51 ftfttorp of Spiritual Eisscnr
Stephen E E Lnufi. Hi I ) r
LORDS OF THE LEFT-HAND PATH:
A History of Spiritual Dissent
Stephen E. Flowers, Ph.D.
Second Edition
© 1997
Copyright © 1997
by Stephen E- Rowers
All rights reserved. No part of this book, either in part or in whole, may be reproduced,
transmitted or utilized in any form or by any means electronic, photographic or mechanical,
including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system,
without the permission in writing from the Publisher, except for brief quotations embodied
in literary articles and reviews.
For permissions, or for the serialization, condensation, or for adaptation write the
Publisher at the address below.
Published by
RUNA-RAVEN PRESS
P.O. Box 557
Smithville, Texas 78957
Printed in the United States of America
PRO OMNIS DOMINIS VIAE SIN1STRAE
contra stupidos
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my appreciation to many who helped in the shaping and re-shaping
of the work:
Michael A. Aquino, Don Webb, Rosemary Webb, R. L. Barrett, Nikolas Schreck, Zeena,
J. Chisholm, Seth Tyrsen, Dianne Ross, Sir Ormsond, and my beloved wife Crystal
Dawn.
Abbreviations
At. Arabic
bce Before Common Era (= B.C.)
ce Common Era (= A.D.)
DMP Demotic Magical Papyri
G. German
Gen. Genesis
Gk. Greek
Heb. Hebrew
Jn. John
Lat. Latin
T .k_ Luke
Mk. Marie
Mt Mathew
PGM Papyri Graecae Magicae (= Pneisendanz’ edition of the
Greek magical papyri)
pi. plural
Rus. Russian
sg. singular
Skt. Sanskrit
vni
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: The Left-Hand Path.1
Introduction.1
The Right-Hand Path and the Left-Hand Path.2
White Magic / Black Magic.3
Lords of the Left-Hand Path.3
Chapter 2: The Eastern Traditions.*.13
The Left-Hand Path in the East.13
Right-Hand Path / Left-Hand Path.15
The Left-Hand Path in Hinduism. 16
Left-Hand Path Hinduism. 18
Methods of the Hindu Left-Hand Path.20
The Left-Hand Path in Buddhism.25
Methods of Left-Hand Path Buddhism. 27
Zoroastrianism and the Left-Hand Path.28
Chapter 3: The Roots of the Western Tradition.35
Roots of the Western Left-Hand Path...35
Pagan Roots in Europe.35
The Hellenic Left-Hand Path......36
Prometheus and Pandora: The Origins of Evil and its
Transformative Effects on Humanity.37
The Myth of Prometheus and the Left-Hand Path.38
The Greek Mysteries and the Left-Hand Path...38
Pythagoras and the Left-Hand Path.40
Plato and the Left-Hand Path.....40
The Epicurean and Stoic Schools.43
The Left-Hand Path in the North.43
The Slavic Left-Hand Path...46
The Left-Hand Path among the Semites....47
The Orthodox Hebrew Synthesis of the Right-Hand Path.49
The Hamitic Left-Hand Path. 51
The Cult of Set.....51
Chapter 4: The First Millennium.57
Gnosticism and the Left-Hand Path.59
Was Jesus a Lord of the Left-Hand Path?.63
Islam and the Left-Hand Path.66
The Assassins and the Old Man of the Mountain.68
The Yezidi Devil Worshippers.69
Chapter 5: The Path of Satan.73
The Left-Hand Path in the Western Middle Ages.73
The Christian Heretics.76
The Dualists.76
The Pantheistic Free Spirits.77
The Witch Craze..79
The Faustian Path.-. 81
Chapter 6: Lucifer Unbound. 87
The Modem Age and New Understandings.87
“Old Nick”.88
Lucifer and the Enlightenmeut.89
To Rule in Hell.89
The Hell-Fire Club.90
The Divine Marquis...-.93
The Dawn of the Faustian Age...95
ix
Goethe and Faust.96
The Classical Devil.99
Satan in the 19th Century.100
The Devil and the Romantics.100
Le Diable au XIXe Siecle...104
Leo Taxil and the Anarchistic Art of Hoaxing.106
The Red Devil.106
The Devil and Karl Marx.109
The Anarchistic Devil.109
The Rites and Rituals of Bolshevism.Ill
The Bolsheviks and the “Empire of Evil”.114
The Will to Power: Nietzsche the Antichrist.119
Chapter 7: An Interlude in the Absolute Elsewhere:
Adolf Hitler and the Modem Mythologizing of Evil. 120
Nazi Irrationalism and Paganism. 120
The Facts behind the Mythos.,.120
Nazi Medievalism and Science.121
The Life of Adolf Hitler; The Wolf Unbound.121
The Life of Heinrich Himmler:
Lord of the Black Knights...122
Sources for the Study of the Nazis and Magic.123
Nazi Cosmology.-.123
Nazi Methodology.124
The Rituals of Nazism.125
The Nazis and the Left-Hand Path.129
Chapter 8: The Occult Revival.133
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky
and the Theosophical Society.133
Theosophy and the Left-Hand Path.*.135
HPB and the “Light Bearer”. 136
The Great Beast: Aleister Crowley.137
Sources for the Study of Thelemism.138
Crowley's Magical Orders.138
Crowley's Cosmology.139
Philosophy of Man.141
Crowley’s Theology. 142
The Technology of Magick.144
Vision.. .... 146
The Satumians and Gregor A. Gregorius.147
History of the FS.147
Saturnian Cosmology.148
Humanity in the Dark Light of Saturn.149
Saturnian ‘Theology”. 150
The Initiatory Path of Saturn.150
The Saturnian Vision..151
Gregor A. Gregorius and the Left-Hand Path.151
Austin Osman Spare: The Lover of the Self..152
The Fourth Way and the Left-Hand Path.153
Remarkable Men.155
Sources of Study. 157
The Organization of the Work.158
The Work.158
x
The Seven Men: The Concept of Initiation
tlia tiiMirth Wav . ..
. 159
Ill IUL' 1 UUi .
Mil..,,*»****»'iii*Tt* a
1 lit jLrau^a^i .......
A UAnrtfi Won TllArtl AOV 1 ) . . ..............
. 163
n. rvuiui 11 u.y j. uvviuj,;.
TUo A^otVi ru'lrtl f\0\l . . 163
“Evil” and the Fourth Way.
Tp tv.,* Fnnrtti Waif T pft-Hafld Pflth*^ .
. 164
. 164
IS tllC rourui W ay Leu ntuiu I au^.***.*...*
Modern Witchcraft and the Left-Hand Path.
Chapter 9: Anton Szandor LaVey
and the Church of Satan . ..
TUa T nf Atitnn T aVpv .
. 165
. 171
. 172
TVo Mvth nf fir T aVev .
. 175
tl« pnflvT Phnrrli of SstilTi .._ ...
. 177
TLrt rifdAtar Plinrph nf .
. 178
1 He ureaier v^nuitu vi ..-.
The Withdrawal of Dr. LaVey:
The Church of Satan after 1975.
Sources for the Study of Anton LaVey.
Organization of the Church of Satan.
Pre-1975 Degree System of the Church .
Post-1975 Degree System of the Church .
Major Doctrines of the Church of Satan .
The Nine Satanic Statements.
Tin MIno Cototiir *s i n <; ....
.179
. 180
. 181
. 182
. 183
. 184
. 185
.187
The Eleven Rules of the Earth .
The Satanic Cosmology: or
the World According to the Abominable Dr. LaVey.
.188
.189
.190
T nUai 7 nri T'^nallCTTI . .....
.191
The Power of Limited Resources .
The Satanic View of Mankind .. .
. 193
.194
. 195
Man as a v^diuai ^ 5 ^** . ...
Satanic Society and the Invisible War .
Gender Politics and Imagery .
“Tl .11 AXn t-o 111 c T oVpv” . ...
. 195
. 197
.197
. 198
J. lit- lViailJUW T . ...
saianic miiinjiiaiiijr .
.
Satanic Magic in Theory and Practice .
. 203
. 203
satamc a lluhuiu^iwi ...
The Practice of Greater and Lesser Magic .
.203
.203
Greater Magic .....
Dnr/itl AHTfltn fltip Mfldip ._...
.204
.205
aaramc ± sywiuuiaiuaut magiw...*
. 206
jbrouc crysiaiiiiauun ...
. 207
1 rapezoiuaji M*giv.-.
.208
Anton LaVey and the Left-Hand Path ...
Chapter 10: Michael A. Aquino: The Temple of Set .
TL Cnnn rtf Pa.nri-^Pt .
.209
. 215
.215
me saga oi ..
. 215
The Life of the Second Beast .
.214
xi
The Tree in the North...221
The Flourishing of the Temple.222
Sources for the Study of the Temple of Set. 222
The Jeweled Tablets of Set.222
The Inspired Works of Michael Aquino.223
Secondary Sources on the Temple.224
The Organizational Principles of the Temple.226
The Degree System of the Temple of Set.226
Orders within the Temple of Set.229
The Black Magical Universe: Sedan Cosmology.229
Behold the Majesty of Set: Setian Theology. 231
The Children of Set: Setian Anthropology.233
The Black Flame.233
The Elect of the Temple of Set.233
The Grail of Life beyond Death.234
Setian Magical Technology:
Black Magic in Theory and Practice. 235
Setian White Magic.236
The Practice of Lesser Black Magic.237
The Practice of Greater Black Magic.237
Xeper: Initiatory Black Magic.238
Ultima Futura: The Vision of the Temple of Set.239
Michael Aquino and the Left-Hand Path.240
Appendix: The Urban Legend of Satanicism.243
Terminus Viae: Afterword.249
Glossary.251
Bibliography.253
Preface
To the 1997 Edition
An Untimely Meditation
I began writing this book at the beginning of 1989 and for all practical purposes it was
complete in late 1992. It was written during a time of great dynamism in my own life, and
although the contents of the book may appear to many outward observers to be staid and
even static, this dynamism is present just below the surface. This book was composed in
large measure as a response to the irrational “Satanic scare” of the late 1980s and early
1990s. It was written with the intention of reaching a wide readership of thinking
individuals capable of understanding the historical and cultural scope of ideas underlying
the images of the left-hand path.
The manuscript proved to be an untimely one in this regard, I attempted to interest
literary agents and publishers of all kinds in the manuscript— it was universally rejected.
Large publishers were evidently only interested in books which sent one of two messages:
either “devil worshippers are dangerous and lurking in your schools and day-care centers
and you should be very afraid,” or “there are no such things as Satanists and those who call
themselves that are bafoons.” Of course, this book provided neither of these approved
cultural messages. Lords of the Left-Hand Path is a sober, objectively sympathetic and
scholarly look at individuals and schools of thought which have been referred to as being left-
hand path. This serious approach was thought to be “too disturbing” — as one agent put it
to me — to be published for a broad readership.
Smaller publishers too found reasons to reject the manuscript. In this instance it was
usually because the interpretations of their own sacred cows were seen as too controversial, or
that certain individuals or schools of thought simply could not ever be mentioned in a book
published by that company— such are the farces at work in the media today.
This is a forbidden book.
The contents of this book come through my own lens of understanding. The lens is my
own and I take full responsibility and credit for both its shortcomings and any glory attached
to it However, it must also be ssid that, because of my particular hermeneutic, each of the
individuals and schools observed in this text also contributed to the shaping and refinement
of that lens. Beyond these there are other such shapers— chief among them my experience in
academia. The intellectual techniques learned in that environment, perhaps more than any
other are responsible for the form and nature of this text
The original draft of chapter 9 of this book contained more extensive quotes from Anton
LaVey. Permissions were denied for the use of these quotes, so this chapter was rewritten
avoiding any extensive or contiguous quotations of the works by LaVey. The resulting text is
perhaps less positive toward the Church of Satan than it might have been if LaVey had
allowed himself to speak directly. However, the analysis in the chapter is now actually
immensely more accurate.
It should also be noted that the author of this book is in not a Satanist, but is a practitioner
of the left-hand path based on purely indigenous European models.
This is the first and last book I shall write on the subject of the left-hand path. What I have
to say about the major schools discussed here has been said in this text I have now returned
to my own garden, there to tend the saplings of seeds long planted.
Stephen E. Flowers
Woodhairow
Friday June 13, 1997
To the 1992 Edition
Is there a sinister conspiracy of Satanic forces loose in the world causing mayhem,
abducting, abusing, and even sacrificing children and others to His Satanic Majesty? The
media have asked these and other equally sensational questions have been asked in the
recent past, and offered the most dramatic and entertaining answers possible for the
consumption of a bored and dull public.
If the question arises as to whether there is a coherent Satanic or left-hand path
philosophy or theology, the answer has to be that there is, and that there has been for
centuries. However, the philosophers of this path of the left-hand have rarely been directly
heard from until this century. The present age offers us the unique opportunity to hear
directly from the Lords of the Left-Hand Path in a way unknown since the days of ancient
philosophers.
We live in an age which enables us to become better informed of a wide variety of
viewpoints and approaches to the spiritual problems of being human beings, it at the same
time is an age which enconrages a monotonous sameness in the answers to fundamental
questions acceptable in a mass culture. The philosophers of the left-hand have always
challenged the all-pervasive common ways of doing things — whatever those ways might
have been — and thus have always been agents for change. The left-hand path, as
expressed in the world today, is an open challenge to certain individuals who are ready to
take it up. It is also now for the first time in ages being expressed openly in the hope that
by knowing what its true character is, those who choose not to follow it will at least be
informed as to what it is all about, and in this knowledge lose at least some of their age-old
fear of it
The point of view championed in this book is decidedly that of the left-hand path itself.
I have years of training as a scholar, and have put these and other skills I have acquired to
use in shaping a sympathetic, yet objective analysis of the major historical and
contemporary m anif estations of this fascinating ultimate adventure of the human spirit in
the cosmos. This will be a refreshing departure. There have been dozens of recent books,
and hundreds of books throughout history, which have purported to study the Devil and all
his works from a decidedly antagonistic viewpoint. There have also been a very few
studies for public consumption written by modem philosophical Satanists from a highly
polemic angle. I trust that the objective reader will be no more put off by my viewpoint than
he or she would be if a Catholic priest would write a book on the history of Christian
theology.
There is a clear and present need for this work as there has never been a work of its
kind, and this vacuum is becoming dangerous to the philosophical fabric of the post¬
modern world. Again the cries of “Bum the witch!,” “Kill the heretic!,” and “Death to the
Satanist!” are being heard. This time not so much from priests and evangelists — who have
already largely been discredited in this day and age — but by therapists and law
enforcement officers, bolstered by the medieval world-views of extremist theologians. In
the past it was impossible for the lords of the left-hand path to speak out; now the time has
come when it is necessary that they must do so. This book indirectly gives a voice to all
those who have tread the leftward road throughout history and who continue to explore it in
the present world. If it brings just one ray of enlightenment on these matters, it will have
done its work.
Dr. Stephen E. Flowers
Austin, Texas
Friday, January 13, 1989
XIV
Chapter 1
The Left-Hand Path
Introduction
We will begin with definitions. Philosophical inquiry calls for clarity, and we need
clarity for this publicly unexplored realm. Without these precise definitions anyone
exploring this path on any level will be led into the sea of misunderstandings and confusion
(evident in the section below on the historical portrayals of the left-hand path and “black
magic”)- Exact understanding of the nature of the left-hand path hinges on a precise theory
of the universe in which it is perceived. This theory and the model it presents will prove
useful in analyzing the left-hand path traditions throughout history.(l)
The universe is the totality of existence both known and unknown. This is a complex
model, divided into at least two components: 1) the objective universe and 2) the subjective
universe. The objective universe is the natural cosmos— or world order. This is essentially
mechanical or organic, Le. it is ruled by certain predictable laws manifested in a time/space
continuum. The objective universe, including the laws governing it, can be equated with
“nature” as well as with “God” in the Judeo-Christian tradition. All of natural science as
well as orthodox theology is predicated on the concept that these laws of the objective
universe can be discovered and quantified or described in a purely rational manner in the
first instance or by “divine revelation” in the other. When considered closely it is evident
that what is usually referred to as “God” in orthodox religions is actually identical to that
which he is said to create— the natural/mechanical/organic order— or cosmos . It might
also be pointed out that there has generally been a popular but sometimes misleading
distinction between the concepts “mechanical” and “organic.” On one level they are the
same in that both are governed by predictable laws. A clock-work or the human body arc
both ruled and maintained by certain mechanical structures which allow them to function in
their environments. At another level there is a distinction between the mechanical and the
organic in that the organic model has the ability to propagate and mutate its mechanical
structures to ensure its survival. This is possible because there are coded mechanisms
within the organism expressly for this purpose (DNA) and because the malleable molecular
structure of the mechanism allows for these mutations.
The subjective universe is the “world” of any sentient entity within the universe. There
are as many subjective universes as there are sentient beings. The subjective universe is the
particularized manifestation of consciousness within the universe. Usually experience of
the objective universe is only indirect as information concerning it must come through the
subjective universe. Curiously enough the subjective universe does not seem governed by
the same natural/mechanical/organic laws as the objective universe— in fact this is the main
distinction between them. The subjective universe has the option of acting in a non-natural
way, i.e. free from the limitations of the world of five senses and three dimensions.
At this point it might be worth pointing out that the terms objective/subjective have
nothing in common with the distinction between accurate/inaccurate, or exact/inexact which
1
popular usage might have projected onto the terms. The subjective universe is capable of
far more accurate and exact manifold operations than the objective universe— your reading
and understanding of these words is based on the exercise of a faculty within your
subjective universe. In simple grammatical terms the subject is the reader, i.e. that which
reads, and the object is that which is read. The subjective universe is capable of a full
spectrum of possibilities which range from virtually absolute precisions to almost total
delusion because it is not bound by natural laws. The focus or epicenter of this non-natural
subjective universe is equated with human consciousness, or soul, or self.
The non-natural aspect of this soul is clearly and basically indicated by humanity’s
drive to impose structures artificially created in that subjective universe upon the objective
universe. All artificially created structures (i.e. those made by art/craft) are by definition
something separate and apart from the natural cosmos— be those structures pyramids,
poems, or political institutions. Animals, many of which may have complex social
organizations, are bound by nature and by their organic programming. The wolf-pack, no
matter if in one part of the world or another, now or a million years ago, has the same
social order. But you will look in vain to find any two human social institutions that are
absolutely identical. Anything which is the product of the subjective universe — individual
or collective — will bear the mark of variation.
Each particular instance of this soul — this phenomenon of the subjective universe —
implies the existence of a first form or general principle from which all the particular
manifestations are derived. In the most philosophically refined of the schools of the left-
hand path this first principle of isolate intelligence is identified as the “Prince of Darkness,”
or the ultimate deity of the left-hand path. This is the archetype of the Self from which all
particular selves are derived. This is also an element of the non-natural universe which
objectively belongs to the universe itself. In this way the Prince of Darkness can be seen as
an independent sentient being in the objective universe because this is the very principle of
that quality in the universe. Humanity is the only species we know of which shares that
quality.
The Right-Hand Path and the Left-Hand Path
The central question now becomes what is the way in which this conscious, free soul is
going to relate to, or seek to interact with, the objective universe or the universe as a whole.
The right-hand path answers this question simply by saying that the subjective universe
must harmonize itself with the laws of the objective universe— be that envisioned as God
or nature. Humanity is to seek knowledge of the law, and then apply itself to submitting to
that law in order to gain ultimate union with the objective universe, with God, or nature.
The right-hand path is the path of union with universal reality (God or Nature). When this
union is completed the individual self will be a nnihil ated, the individual will become one
with the divine or natural cosmic order. In this state the ego is destroyed as “heaven” is
entered or a nirvanic existence/non-existence is “attained.” This is clearly the goal of all
orthodox Judaic/Christian/Islamic or Buddhistic sects.
'Die left-hand path considers the position of humanity as it is; it takes into account the
manifest and deep-seated desire of each human being to be a free, empowered, independent
actor within his or her world. The pleasure and pain made possible by independent
existence are seen as something to be embraced and as the most reasonable signs of the
highest, most noble destiny possible for humans to attain— a kind of independent existence
on a level usually thought of as divine.
Just as most humans go through their natural, everyday lives seeking that which will
give them maximal amounts of such things as knowledge, power, freedom, independence
and distinction within their world, those who walk the left-hand path logically extend this
to the non-natural realm. They eschew right-hand path admonitions that such “spiritual
behavior” is “eviT” and that they should basically ”get with the program” (of God, of
Nature, etc.) and become good "company men.” The self awareness of independence is
seen by many as the fundamental reality of the human condition— one can accept it and
2
live, or reject it and die. By accepting the internal, known reality of human consciousness
an eternally dynamic — ever moving, ever changing — existence is embraced; by rejecting
it and embracing an external, unknown reality of God/Nature, an eternally static— ever still
and permanent — existence is accepted. From a certain enlightened perspective, both paths
are perfectly good, it is just a matter of the conscious exercise of the will to follow one of
these paths in an aware state without self-delusion.
Essentially, the left-hand path is then the path of non-union with the objective universe.
It is the way of isolating consciousness within the subjective universe and, in a state of
self-imposed psychic solitude, refining the soul or psyche to ever more perfect levels. The
objective universe is then made to harmonize itself with the will of the individual psyche
instead of the other way around. Where the right-hand path is theocentric (or certainly
alleocentric— “other-centered”), the left-hand path is psychecentric, or soul/self-centered.
Those within the left-hand path may argue over the nature of this self/ego/soul, but that the
individual is the epicenter of the path itself seems undisputed. An eternal separation of the
individual intelligence from the objective universe is sought in the left-hand path. This
amounts to an immortality of the independent self consciousness moving within the
objective universe and interacting with it at will.
White Magic/Black Magic
The terms “white magic” and “black magic” have been so bandied about in popular
jargon that they might be said to have lost most of their meaningfulness. For my purposes I
will restore them to a meaningful philosophical context. Magic can be defined as a
methodology by which the configuration of die subjective or objective universe is altered
through an act of will originating within the psyche, or the core of the individual subjective
universe. Perhaps the most famous definition was offered by the English magician, Aleister
Crowley who said: “Magic(k) is the Science and Art of causing Change to occur in
conformity with Will.”(2)
Actually there is no one definition of magic universally accepted by academics and
practicing magicians alike, nor is there common agreement on the distinctions between
religion and magic. But taking most of the current theories into account a more
comprehensive definition might be ventured: Magic is the willed application of symbolic
methods to cause or prevent changes in the universe by means of symbolic acts of
communication with paranormal factors. These factors could be inside or outside the
subjective universe of the operator. Magic is a way to make things happen that ordinarily
would not happen. Religion may be distinguished from magic only when the nature of the
human will is taken into account. In magic the individual will is primary and is considered
to have a real and independent existence. The magician makes the universe do his bidding,
to harmonize itself with his will, whereas in religion the human community attempts to
harmonize its behavior with a universal pattern, be it God or Nature.
In a precise sense the distinction between White and Black Magic is simply that White
Magic is a psychological methodology for the promotion of union with the universe and
pursuing aims in harmony with those of the universe, while Black Magic is such a
methodology for the exercise of independence from the universe and pursuing self-oriented
aims. Structurally, White Magic has much in common with religion as defined above,
while Black Magic is more purely magical in and of itself. This is why magic as a category
of behavior is often condemned by orthodox religious systems.
The historical conceptualizations of White Magic and Black Magic will be discussed
below, but for the sake of precise understanding here, I will simply be using White Magic
as a designation for the spiritual methodology or technology of the right-hand path and
Black Magic as a designation for that of the left-hand path.
Lords of the Left-Hand Path
In this book I examine the ideas and careers of many magicians and philosophers of the
past and present Some are figures widely thought to be “Satanic” or evil, while others may
have gone through history without such an image. But images rarely correspond to
3
reality— despite what Madison Avenue or Washington DC would have you believe. In the
final analysis some of these figures will be rejected as being something other than
practitioners of the left-hand path. The criteria I use in determining the true left-hand path
character of those so deemed must be laid out clearly at this point. Some of those
considered in the book will have a number of the criteria, but not enough to be considered a
“lord” or master of the path.
There are two major criteria for being considered a true Lord of the Left-Hand Path—
Deification of the Seif and Antmomianism. The first of these is complex: The system of
thought proposed by the magician or philosopher must be one that promotes individual
self-deification, preferably based on an initiatorily magical scheme. This first criterion will
be seen to have four distinct elements:
1) Self-deification— attainment of an enlightened (or awakened),
independently existing intellect and its relative immortality.
2) Individ ualism — the enlightened intellect is that of a given individual, not a
collective body
3) Initiation— the enlightenment and strength of essence necessary for the
desired state of evolution of self are attained by means of stages created by
the will of the magician, not because he or she was “divine” to begin with.
4) Magic— practitioners of the left-hand path see themselves as using their
own wills in a rationally intuited system or spiritual technology designed to
cause the universe around them to conform to their self-willed patterns.
The second criterion, antmomianism, states that practitioners think of themselves as
“going against the grain” of their culturally conditioned and conventional norms of “good”
and “evil.” True Lords of the Left-Hand Path will have the spiritual courage to identify
himself with the cultural norms of “evil.” There will be an embracing of the symbols of
conventional “evil,” or “impurity,” or “rationality,” or whatever quality the conventional
culture fears and loathes. The lord of the left-hand path will set himself apart from his
fellow man, will actually or figuratively become an outsider, in order to gain the kind of
inner independence necessary for the other initiatory work present in the first criterion. The
practice of this second criterion often manifests itself in “antmomianism,” that is, the
purposeful reversal of conventional normatives: “evil” becomes “good,” “impure” becomes
“pure,” “darkness” becomes “light”
Literally antmomianism implies something “against the law.” But the practitioner of the
left-hand path is not a criminal in the usual sense. He or she is bound to break the cosmic
laws of nature and to break the conventional social laws imposed by ignorance and
intolerance. But in so doing the left-hand path practitioner seeks a “higher law” of reality
founded on knowledge and power. Although beyond good and evil, tins path requires the
most rigorous of ethical standards. These standards are based on understanding and not on
blind obedience to external authorities.
This latter characteristic of the true left-hand path is the chief cause of its
misunderstanding, not only for those on the outside, but for some who would follow this
path as well. It takes an enormous amount of spiritual courage to persevere in the face of
rejection by not only the world around them but by elements within their own subjective
universes as well. Many break under the strain and fall away from the aim and sink back
into the morass of cultural norms.
To be considered a true lord of the left-hand path then, someone must have rejected the
forms of conventional “good” and embraced those of conventional “evil,” and have
practiced antmomianism, as part of the effort to gain a permanent , independent , enlightened
and empowered level of being. This self-deification does not seem sufficient without the
“Satanic” component which acts as a guide through the quagmire of popular sentiment and
conventional beliefs.
4
In completing research for this book I discovered that in fact there are two distinct
branches of the left-hand path. Both of these branches fulfill the criteria outlined above, but
approach the process from distinct points of view. One of these, which I will call the
“Immanent Branch of the Left-hand Path,” proceeds from an “objectivistic” and even
materialistic outlook. Its magical methods are often steeped in imagery and its orientation is
almost exclusively toward the objective or mundane universe. In this branch the antinomian
aspect is especially pronounced. Among modem schools it is exemplified by LaVeyan
Satanism. (See chapter 9.)
The second branch, which I will name the ‘Transcendental Branch of the Left-Hand
Path,” is based upon a psychecentric (soul- or intellect-centered) model. It is highly
idealistic and its magical methods are usually founded on eternal forms or archetypes. The
ultimate separation of the human mind from the cosmic order around it is recognized and
celebrated. In its highest forms the Transcendent Branch is focused on the subjective
universe— on the separation of the Self from the cosmic order and the evolution of that
Self into a permanent and empowered form. In this branch the self-divinizing aspect is
especially pronounced. Among modem schools it is exemplified by the Sedan magical
philosophy of Michael Aqnino. (See chapter 10.)
I will begin with the left-hand path as understood in “eastern” religious systems— that
is systems which have their origins in the Indo-Iranian cultural sphere. I will discuss the
concepts of the right-hand path versus the left-hand path in the context of Hinduism and
Buddhism (in which the terms first originated), this section will place the whole discussion
in a non-Judeo-Christian context, and in one in which the two paths co-exist within the
same cosmology. Also included here is a treatment of the Zoroastrian doctrines of dualism
and how they affected the development of the left-hand path in the west
The philosophical systems of certain great world cultures, such as those of the Far East
(China and Japan), or the Meso-American world, will be noted for their absence. This is
partially due to limitations in my own knowledge, but it also seems that the systems of
Taoism and Shinto, for example, lack the stria dichotomies necessary to understanding the
role of the individual in the universe in terms of the “two paths.” The degree to which they
are present in either system seems to have been the result of contact with Indo-Aryan
thought in the form of Buddhism.
In the second part of the book, I will discuss the western branches of the left-hand
path. First we must understand clearly the true nature of the “western” traditions. It is
important to know the degree to which indigenous European systems share elements with
the “eastern” traditions, and the degree to which the “west” is really a product of southern
influence— chiefly coming from the Middle East and Egypt What we often call “eastern”
is in fact more truly western (or northern), while what we call “western” is really more
truly “middle eastern” or southern.
In the discussion of the original European traditions we will first explore the Greco-
Roman world. The Promethean myth is seen as a paradigm of the relationship of the
“creator god” and the “giver of the gift of the divine spark.” In the north we will see the
Odinic myth as an original paradigm of the Prince of Darkness which foreshadows the
Faustian themes to come.
The west, of course, became greatly influenced by Middle Eastern traditions through
the conversion to Christianity (a Judaic cult from the east), as well as Judaism itself and late
Islam. Understanding of this tradition is essential to understanding the left-hand path in the
west today. Interesting here are Sumerian as well as Semitic backgrounds on the role of
“gods of evil” in non-Judaic Semitic religion.
The Egyptian tradition, especially as it regard the cult of the god Set, is important not
only for the understanding of ancient left-hand path traditions, but also for its possible
significance for the contemporary Temple of Set
To grasp the deepest significance of the left-hand path in the west from the time of the
conversions to the dawn of the post modem age (after World War II) Christian period. We
5
must discover the Judaic roots of Christianity in Christian ideas of “evil” and of the nature
of Satan. In this regard we can not ignore the importance of the Gnostic (especially Ophite
and Naassene: “serpentine”) interpretations on the role of the Serpent/Lucifer and his
Promethean relationship with humankind.
This can be starkly contrasted with the orthodox Christian doctrine concerning the same
Edemc myth. It will be apparent that a close, rational and objective reading of the “Myth of
Eden” shows that the Serpent is indeed the “savior” of humanity, and its “creator” in a
spiritual sense.
We will also see the remarkable history of the left-hand path within the Islamic tradition
where we will meet some of the most self-aware followers of this path before this century.
Many people, modem practicing Satanists among them, somehow believe that die
Middle Ages were a great time for Satanic activity. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The medieval period was almost devoid of true left-hand path activity— although the
Church often liked to believe, and encourage others to believe, that Satanic cults were
lurking under every rock. This ended in the “witch craze” of the 16th and 17th centuries as
a predictable manifestation of right-hand path ignorance and fear run amok.
One interesting outgrowth of the medieval tradition in Germany was the Faustian myth
which leads us into the modem age and beyond. This will depend greatly on the transition
from the ideas surrounding the Faustian magicians of the late Middle Ages to those
surrounding Goethe’s Faust — the transition from the medieval mind-set (seeking of
knowledge and power is inherently “evil”) to a modem mind-set (seeking of knowledge
and power is good). Here we really have a return to ancient precepts. Images of the Devil
in Classical and Romantic ideologies are certainly important to this transition in western
culture.
The 19th century “Satanists” of France cannot be ignored, even though they offer up a
disappointing picture when viewed from a left-hand path perspective. Most of them have
little or no understanding of the positive traits of the left-hand path— but merely wallow in
the darkness as an exercise in obscure aesthetics.
For the understanding of the rise of philosophical Satanism in the latter half of the 20th
century no period of history is more important than the occult revival of the late 19th and
early 20th century. The original Luciferian/Ophite-Gnostic doctrines of the Theosophy of
H. P. Blavatsky (especially as expressed in The Secret Doctrine) form one branch of this
tradition, while the Thelemism of Aleister Crowley forms another. Crowley must be
viewed here from a totally philosophical perspective. He is doubtless one of the most
important theorists concerning the left-hand path in the modem western world— yet he
holds an extremely ambiguous relationship to it In connection to Thelemism we must also
discuss the German school of Satumiam, originally led by Gregor A. Gregorius (Eugen
Grosche). The final part of the book will deal in detail with the two most important
contemporary versions of left-hand path philosophy, Anton LaVey’s Church of Satan, and
the Temple of Set
Throughout this book I will try to cut through the confusion, misinformation — and
even disinformation — about the left-hand path and practice of actual Black Magic based on
the exact principles outlined in this chapter. This is not to say that I am not aware that
throughout history certain of these terms have been used by followers of the right-hand
path, or by those who have simply been misled by such sources for many years, in ways
very different from the way I am using them. The distinction must simply be made that I
am writing about the left-hand path from an internal perspective, while most other sources
are written from an external one. Reading what someone from the right-hand path has to
say about the left-hand path is rather like reading a book on Wall Street written by an
economics professor schooled at the University of Moscow. He may have interesting
insights but without the perspective of a Wall Street broker you will probably not get much
closer to really understanding how the stock market works.
6
Historically the left-hand path has sometimes been identified by the methods it is said to
use, such as necromancy (raising the dead for divinatory purposes) and sexual magic >::
seems the right-hand path has always had a problem with sexuality). In point of fact there
are no categorical methodological proscriptions on the left-hand path within its various
traditions east or west. Methods are usually chosen for purely pragmatic reasons. If it
works it will usually be implemented. There is often a strong antinomian element in tte
magical methodology of the left-hand path. Going against the grain of social conventions or
natural boundaries is often seen as a mode of consciously exercising the divine faculty
inherent in humanity. This factor must be seen in the broadest perspective, however, as
some behaviors which may seem to be antinomian or against social conventions or
propriety, e.g. ingesting massive doses of intoxicants, are actually roundly condemned by
the most sophisticated practitioners of the left-hand path in the west The philosophical
basis for this is that such intoxicants impair the exercise of the individual will and self— the
supreme faculty viewed from the perspective of the left-hand path. Drugs would, from this
point of view, be more effective at attaining the self-annihilation sought within the right-
hand path.
Another way in which black magic has sometimes historically been differentiated from
white magic is the classification of entities with which, or with whom, the magician is said
to deal. White magicians would invoke only ‘‘angelic” beings, while black magicians would
call on “demonic” entities. This is, of course, predicated on medieval Christian
angelologies and demonologies, and one quite often finds in the old grimoires that demonic
forces are coerced by the power of the names of God to do the bidding of the magician—
which could be virtually anything. Angels could be used to seduce or kill, demons to gain
wisdom and discover truth. From the point of view of the left-hand path itself this
distinction would be seen as hypocritical. Again the focus would not be on the “hows” but
rather on the purpose, the “whys.”
In this regard the black/white distinction is sometimes historically made between
maleficent and beneficent magic. Magic designed to do harm is black, that which is
supposed to heal or do good is white. Tins distinction at least has some valid aspects. The
ordy problems from the left-hand path viewpoint are that 1) it does not address any of the
essential cosmological or theological questions regarding the two paths, and 2) it is
generally unrealistic. “White magicians,” when push comes to shove, usually have no
problem in asking (or coercing) God or angels into giving them victory over their enemies
and vanquishing their “diabolical foes” (Le., anyone who dares cross them). The left-hand
path views magic as a technique or methodology of human action which in and of itself is
devoid of moral value— magic doesn’t kill people, magicians kill people. The use of Black
Magic would be viewed as being governed by the same ethical standards as all other
categories of h uman behavior. The Black Magician refuses to be limited in his use of magic
just because this activity belongs to a class of behavior usually condemned by orthodox
religion. If a goal is worth attaining by any means it is perfectly acceptable to use magic if
necessary to attain it. If a war is worth waging, or if a man has good reason to defend
himself from attack, the Black Magician will have no problem with using magic to destroy
his enemy. He also sees nothing but hypocrisy in the White Magician who prays, or who
uses physical means for the same ends while condemning the Black Magician as evil. The
use of Black Magic is simply a logical extension of human motives into the realm of magic.
Finally, there is the fundamental distinction between the two paths: that of union versus
non-union, which has already been discussed. It is from this basic principle that even the
other misguided distinctions can be understood best. From a position of magical
independence the Black Magician would be able to employ pragmatically any magical
technology he willed, deal with any kind of entity (or most probably dispense with
interaction with exterior entities altogether), and seek any end he desired— in each case
being guided by an internal sense of purpose and responsibility. Ultimate spiritual
independence is the essential quality of the left-hand path. With the freedom this quality
7
provides comes the possibility for unethical behavior— this is, after all, the price of
freedom.
The existence of the left-hand path is not easily discovered, but once its principles have
been uncovered it slowly becomes apparent just how widespread the philosophy is. In this
work I am concentrating on schools and individuals who either are self-avowedly followers
of the left-hand path (e.g., vamamarga , Church of Satan, Temple of Set), or who have
knowledge of it and perhaps though they try to differentiate themselves from it (at least
publicly) seem to have actually been practitioners of the left-hand path when viewed from
the perspective of the path itself (e.g., H. P. Blavatsky or Aleister Crowley). However, the
basic precepts of the left-hand path have for centuries penetrated far beyond the sphere of
magical and occult activity. Many ancient philosophies were based on principles held in
common with the left-hand path and it was only with the advent of Christianity tha t those
philosophies were either first suppressed as evil, or “Christianized” so as to be made
palatable, e.g. the cult of Odin or Pythagorean/Platonic philosophy. More recently, modem
philosophies and political ideologies have fully embraced principles basic and fundamental
to the left-hand path, almost all of which have become the accepted norm in the west It is
quite understandable why the forces of orthodox Christianity fought every advance in
scientific, political, or religious philosophy, for each advance in spiritual freedom and
enforcement of the interests of plurality over unity is indeed a victory for the Prince of
Darkness — the principle of isolate intelligence — over the monolithic, singular force of
the rule of God.
8
Notes for Chapter 1
(1) A chief source for this discussion is Michael A. Aquino’s “Black Magic in Tfeor*
and Practice” (San Francisco: Temple of Set, 1987) [= Crystal Tablet of Set, pp. 1-61.^
(2) Aleister Crowley. Magick (New York: Weiser, 1974), p. 131.
9
The Left-Hand Path in the East
Chapter 2
The Eastern Tradition
I contemplate in my heart the nonfearful divinity of shining darkness.
(Shivatoshini 1.1.14.)
— The Left-Hand Path in the East —
For the western reader the examination of the left-hand path, within the context of
orthodox right-hand path cults of the east, will quickly demonstrate in a uniquely objective
fashion the true structural meanings of what the left-hand path is really all about It has the
added advantage of showing this within cultures that have been relatively tolerant of the
aims and motives of the left-hand path. By exploring the left-hand path from the
perspective of eastern traditions first we can solve a few problems for ourselves later. The
approach to the east will disentangle many of the arguments from the sometimes hopelessly
confused jumble we find in the historical sources of the left-hand path in the west It will
eventually become apparent that the division into “eastern” and “western” branches has
been done simply to present certain ideas in a clear and organized fashion. The left-hand
path is an ever recurring answer to humanity’s questions beyond the restrictions of time
and place.
Here I will consider as “eastern” the traditions which haves their distinctive origins in
the Indo-Iranian cultural sphere of southern Asia, that is: Hinduism, Buddhism and
Zoroastrianism.
The east/west division dissolves with an understanding of the common traditional roots
of both— in the substrata of Indo-European philosophies. Furthermore, the entirely cross-
cultural nature of the left-hand path will become more obvious. The principles upon which
the right-hand path / left-hand path distinction are based are found throughout the history of
humankind and over a broad cultural spectrum. The true lords of the left-hand path have
dwelled in the world at all times and in all places and can not be limited to any time or
geographical area.
The ultimate roots of the Indo-Iranian (Aryan) religious and philosophical traditions are
not to be found on the Indian subcontinent itself, but rather in the Caucus region and on the
planes of present day southern Russia. It was most probably in this region that a multi-
phased migration of local populations began during the fourth millennium bce.(1) This
population is known by the cumbersome and unromantic name “Indo-European.” This is
because the final migratory destinations of this originally unified group was to stretch from
western Europe all the way to India and to the border of China.
The original Indo-Europeans were a semi-nomadic people who had first domesticated
the horse on the open steppes, invented the wheel (essential to their war-chariots and
wagons), and who had first learned to smelt metals as hard as copper. With this
combination of horse, wheel and copper, they were virtually invincible in battle— and so
spread themselves out over vast expanses of territory. They slowly conquered and subdued
the local populations, largely imposing their culture, language and religious system on the
13
region by means of a combination of their military strength and their cultural prestige. So,
roughly at the same time the cities of Mesopotamia were beginning to thrive, and the
pyramids were being built in Egypt, there was in fact another “high culture” that descended
from the north and spread itself throughout most of the known world. But whereas the
Mesopotamians and Egyptians built in stone, the Indo-Europeans built intellectual
monuments. The most striking of these is perhaps the Rig Veda , which has been orally
transmitted from the time of its codification beginning at the end of the second millennium
BCE to the present day . This invisible intellectual edifice has proved many times more
durable than all the stones of other cultures— for it has remained alive , dynamic and
meaningful throughout this time.
Ancient Indo-European philosophy and religion was not based on a unified cult, but
rather on a stratified structure of several levels. These levels, or functions, have been most
elaborately commented on by die French Indo-Europeanist Georges Dumezil and his
followers.(2) The first order belongs to the realm of the intellect — both rational and
intuitive. In the most archaic Indian system these were ruled by the gods Mitra and Vanina
respectively, in the Germanic realm these same functions are filled by Tyr and Odin. The
second order belongs to the realm of physical force— ruled over by the god Indra in the
Vedas , the god Thor in the Norse Eddas. The third order is that of natural procreation or
vitality, which is governed by the Ashvinau in India and by the Vanic deities Frey and
Frey a — the Lord and the Lady — in Germania. These mythic orderings are reflected in
the society as well which is organized in an intelligentsia class — kings, philosophers,
judges and magicians — a warrior class, and a provider class of fanners, craftsmen,
entertainers, etc. This very ancient division is also reflected in Plato’s idealized society
discussed in The Republic (ca 350 bce),(3) where he outlines a state of tradesmen or
craftsmen, auxiliaries or warriors, and guardians or philosophers all with their specialized
functions in the organized society.
What is essential to realize here is that the religions or philosophical attitudes of those of
the first order are radically different from those of the second or third. Those of the first
function focused their attention on the intellect, on the soul or psyche of man. This was the
center of their attention from the beginning. Even in the earliest texts of the Rig Veda the
statement is made by the priests that “We created the gods,” meaning that the gods and
goddesses were really projections of the true divine paradigms concentrated in the
intellectual or psychic faculty of human beings. The second function concerns physical
force and its use— especially in the capacity of the warrior. The third function is centered
in nature and in the cycles of nature and organic life— the powers of production and
reproduction. This external reality is the focus of their religions and philosophical
conceptions. Thus we can see that even at this most archaic stage there was a certain
dichotomy between those who “worshipped” the self or intellect and those who
worshipped “nature.” But from the beginning in the Indo-European framework there was
room and a place for both ends of the spectrum within a productive system. In this context
it was not so much a matter of lateral division, right-hand path /left-hand path, but rather a
vertical one, reflected in the “social structure” of divinities and humanity.
As mentioned above there was also an original division within the first function,
between Mitra and Varuna or Tyr and Odin. Mitra or Tyr represent the rational, ordered
mind— the rationality of cosmic order. Varuna or Odin represent the man tic, dynamic
' mind— the freedom of chaotic flux. This same configuration will later be recognized by the
German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche as the Apollonian and Dionysian tendencies in
humanity.(4) Both must work in an integrated fashion, much as the left and right
hemispheres of the brain must work. But here too there may be a primal seed in the
structures of the psyche which will at times be expressed in terms of the right-hand and
left-hand paths.
14
Because the ancient Indo-European peoples would migrate, conquering and subduing
indigenous populations with forces largely made up of those of the first and second
stratum, the third stratum was often subject to broad influences from the religious and
philosophical concepts and practices of the indigenous populations. However, it would be
a radical error to assume that the original system did not already contain structures capable
of assimilating the input from the native religions. This is why, for example, although
historians of Indian tantnsm will point out that much of tantric practice originates in the
lower castes, and is anti-Brahmanical, there is already precedent for it in the oldest evidence
of the Rig Veda itself.(5) The non-Ary an element did not create the system, but it radically
affected its form as practiced in later Hindu tunes.
It has also been noted that the later “Vedic Way” of Hinduism is not an embodiment of
the actual attitudes present in the Vedas themselves, and that paradoxically the tantric
systems exemplify the spiritual attitudes of the Vedas much more vibrantly than the modem
“Vedic Way ”(6)
Right-Hand Path / Left-Hand Path
The actual origin of the right-hand versus left-hand path terminology itself is rooted in
the vocabulary of Indian tantric sects. The two main divisions of these are the
dakshinachara , “right-way” and the vamachara, “left-way.” The variations in these sects
will be discussed in the section on Hinduism below. The eventual elaboration of the right-
hand/left-hand path distinction is qnite complex, but its origins are most probably rooted in
the widespread tantric doctrines of a natural flow of universal force through the human
body along a left to right line— entering the left, exiting to the right This is mirrored by a
cosmic flow of force from the north to the south. When the human being is oriented toward
the east this flow pattern is said to be in harmony with the one natural to his body, as his
left hand is to the north, his right hand to the south.(7) Here are the roots of the key to the
common antinomianism, reversal of normal patterns, found in left-hand path tantnsm. To
reverse the left to right pattern, contrary to nature and cosmic law, requires an exercise of
the faculty of will. This is an act of rebellion against nature and against divinely ordained
cosmic order. In almost technical terms the dakshinachara is going with the natural flow
and the vamachara is going against the natural flow. In going against this flow, individuals
more fully articulate — individuate — themselves within their environments. Independence
and freedom are attained and maintained— perhaps even personal immortality is to be
gained.
15
It has been noted that the essence of what came to be called the vamachara is actually
the true tantric one and that the term and practices of the dakshinachara were only
introduced later as a reform movement within tantrism.(8) Julius Evola remarks on
distinction between the two paths:
The creative and productive aspect of the cosmic process is signified by the
right hand, by the color white, and by the two goddesses Uma and Gauri (in
whom Shakti appears as Prakashatmika, “she who is light and
manifestation”). The second aspect, that of conversion and return {exitus,
re dims), is signified by the left hand, by the color black, and by the dark,
destructive goddesses Durga and Kali Thus according to the Mahakala-
Tantra, when the left and right hands are in equilibrium we experience
samsara, but when the left hand prevails, we find liberation. (9)
Another fascinating delineation of the distinction between the two paths of spiritual
development in the Hindu context is that found between the two pathways the soul may
take upon death: the devayana (way of the devas [gods]) and the pitriyana (way of the pitris
[ancestors]). The devayana is the polar path, marked by the summer half of the year, when
the sun is moving toward the north pole. Those who take the devayana upon death are
enlightened and become like gods, and will only reincarnate according to their wills. Those
who take the pitriyana , which is the equatorial path, marked by the sun’s motion toward the
equator in the winter half of the year, will reincarnate according to a natural order and will
thus eternally re-incarnate their ancestors. (10)
Alain Danielou remarks that the left-hand path corresponds to a “disintegrating-
tendency” (tamos) which “uses the power of Nature, the passions and instincts of man, to
conquer, with their aid, the world of the senses...This way leads directly from the physical
to the abstract because ... the descending tendency is at both ends of the manifested,
[therefore the left-hand path] may utilize even eroticism and drunkenness as a means of
spiritual achievement”(l 1)
Clearly the left-hand path in Hinduism is associated both with the idea of dis-integration
(separation) and with the practice of antinomianism— of “going against the grain” of
conventions in order to gain spiritual power.
Within the Sanskrit terminology of the In dian sects, the right-hand path is that which
seeks a union or merger between the jivatman, the individual self or soul and the
paramatman, the supreme or universal soul. The left-hand path seeks only to differentiate
the jivatman , articulate, individuate, evolve and immortalize it— without ever consciously
seeking to merge it permanently with anything else.(12)
One who has attained this union with the jivatman is said to be in a state of jivan-
mukti — or an individually liberated state. The classic exposition of the concept of jivan-
mukti is found in a 14th century text by Vidyaranya (died 1386) Jivanmuktiviveka jl 3) The
idea of “liberation in life” was perhaps formally introduced by Samkara (655-687 ce) and it
remains an important component of Advaita Vedanta — based on Samkara’s reading and
interpretations of the Upanishads. The Trpti-dipika by Vidyaranya contains discussions of
lives of jivanmuktas.
The Left-Hand Path in Hinduism
In recent times the most insightful and important studies of left-hand path spirituality in
the Hindu religious context are the brilliant presentations of the teachings of the mysterious
and shadowy Indian sage Vimalananda by the American Ayurvedic physician Robert
Svaboda— Aghora: At the Left Hand of God (1986) and Aghora II: Kundalini (1993).
In general “Hinduism” is the name for a spectrum of religious sects all of which are
based on the ancient Aryan tradition ultimately rooted in the Vedas . There are hundreds of
sects within Hinduism. Often they hold opposing views on what might seem to be
fundamental questions. There are, however, generally things upon which most of these
16
sects agree: 1) that the Veda contains infallible wisdom, 2) that the soul (atman) is immoral
and real, 3) that the soul undergoes continual rebirth (samsara), 4) that this rebirth is
tantamount to suffering, and 5) that the cause of rebirth and its suffering is action (karman .
The aim of orthodox Hindnism is a cessation of rebirth and/or fusion with the universal
absolute.(14) This fusion with the Absolute is called liberation (moksha or mukti). It is in
the methods used to effect this end that the Hindu sects are so diverse.
The major sects of Hinduism are Vaisnavite (derived from the worship of Vishnu) and
Saivite (derived from the worship of Shiva). These major sects are further divided into
hundreds of sub-divisions. At one extreme end of the spectrum of Hindu ‘'sects” are the
philosophical schools chiefly found among the Brahmins. At the other extreme are found
the tan trie cults. These are rarely strictly Vedic and are often anti-Brahmanic. It is,
however, a great mistake to think that all tantric sects are of the left-hand path.
Since the time of the rise of Buddhism (6th-7th century bce) there can be said to have
been truly heretical sects in Hinduism. Heresy as such would only tend to be a “problem”
in a religion with an elaborate fixed dogma. Hinduism is remarkably free of these dogmas
since its pre-historic transition from the Vedic religion. It is for this reason that sects and
philosophies making up a wide spectrum of ideologies can be found within Hinduism and
why what is called the left-hand path can be tolerated within the fold of Hinduism without
its being entirely “orthodox.”
This toleration of the left-hand path traditions does not stem from any enforced or
legislated moral sense of “fair play,” but rather from the fact that the original multiplicity of
paths inherent in the archaic Indo-European system has been preserved in the Indian
ways— both Hinduism and Buddhism. When the ideal is a many hued spectrum of
variation, from left to right, and from bottom to top, the likelihood of developing
dichotomized thinking in terms of black/white is lessened. Typically they do not think in
terms of “this or that,” but rather “this and that.” In this system a sense of layers of
meaning and reality is vigorously preserved. This underlying sense provides for a systemic
tolerance more enduring than anything imposed dogmatically or legislatively. This does not
mean, however, that orthodox followers of the right-hand path would typically think that
the left-hand path is just as valid as their own path. It remains a trait of the right-hand path
to think in terms of either/or, so most typically the orthodox will simply think of the
practitioners of the left-hand path (or any path other than their own) as simply being
“wrong,” or in error. This is explicitly outlined in the Vaikhanasasmarta Sutra (4th century
ce) of the Visaragas who are said to “walk the wrong path.”(15)
Within Hinduism (as elsewhere) the left-hand path can be distinguished first in a
description of its aims or goals, and then in its techniques or methods. According to some
self-proclaimed practitioners of the vamamarga the final destination of the left-hand path is
the same as the right-hand path. It is said that they are two paths to the same end. But it
remains a matter of the perspective of the speaker as to what the exact character of this end
is.
Strictly speaking in Hinduism the aim of the practitioner of the left-hand path
( vamamarga ) is the individual’s union with the individual soul (jivatman ) and the continued
independence of that realized jivatman from the universal or supreme soul (para -
matman).( 16) Another way of putting this might be that the follower of the vamamarga
seeks to actualize his individual self (atman) — the personal divinity — and then maintain
the ongoing independence and freedom of that individuated self.
Historically, this is not that much, if any, different from the archaic Indo-European
beliefs which held that men could become as gods if they lived heroic or magical lives. The
“metaphysic” is the same as it always was, there has just been a revaluation, or new value
judgment, placed on the life of struggle and victory or defeat Where the ancients saw it as
a glorious existence— which they wanted to perpetuate throughout eternity— the
“reformers” of Hinduism and Buddhism both saw this same "cycle of becoming” (samsara)
as “suffering.”
17
Among others, Julius Evola recognizes that the Tantras actually carry on the oldest
tradition of the Vedas — as understood in the Vedic Age itself.
It is through this [operative] worldview that a part of the spirit of the early
Vedic age, despite all, remains alive in the Tantras. In that age humans did
not live as ascetics, struggling with the world and with samara , but rather as
free, uninhibited forces, in the company of various gods and supernatural
energies, rapt in a state of cosmic and triumphant bhss.(17)
Left-Hand Path Hinduism
Since the division into dakshinachara and vamachara is a relatively late one in the
history of Hinduism— perhaps going back no more than a thousand to fifteeen-hundred
years — the sects of Hinduism which strictly can be said to belong to the vamamarga do
not formally belong to the most archaic levels of historic Vedic religion. The technical term
“left-hand path” actually comes from Hindu tantrism, of course. In the more global way
that I am presenting the left-hand path it does not, however, have to be limited to tantric
sects alone. Nevertheless discussions of the left-hand path fall most naturally within the
framework of tantrism.(18)
Some tantric texts identify seven “paths” or “ways” (Ski. acharas ). These are divided
into the “right-path” {dakshinachara) and the ‘left-path” {vamachara) and certain other paths
belong within these two.(19)
dakshinachara
vamachara
Vedachara
Vaisnavachara
Saivachara
Siddantachara
Kaidachara
It is said that one is bom into one of the dakshinacharas , but that one must be initiated
into any of the Vamacharas.{20) This is certainly in keeping with the often found non¬
natural tendencies found within the left-hand path elsewhere. Merely to follow the path
dictated by nature, by birth, is to conform to outer circumstances. But to rebel against one’s
lot, to determine consciously and willfully what one’s path is to be is an exercise of the
faculty which sets the initiate apart from his environment
The three levels of initiation in preparation for the vamachara are:
1) Pashu
2) Vira
3) Divya
The pashu is the “fettered man.” This is the non-initiated individual soul. The pashu
transforms hims elf into a vira through the efforts of his own will. A vira can be recognized
by his politeness, courage, intelligence and activity. One the stage of vira has been
established one becomes eligible for initiation into either the dakshinacha or the vamachara.
If he goes into the right-hand path he will follow the ways of bakhti (devotion) and/or jnana
(knowledge), but on the vamachara he will also learn shakti-mantra (mental power-
patterns) and the panchatattva (five-elements)— both forms of theory and practice which
include sexual rituals. The divya state is achieved when all of the qualities the initiate has
gathered have “become part and parcel of himself, when they cannot be dissociated from
his own entity.”(21)
18
Another way of looking at the various “paths” is that the Vedic, Vaishnava , and Shmva
are meant for pashus, thcdakshinachara and vamachara are for virus , and the siddhanta and
kaula are only open to the divyas of the left-hand path.(22) Although the kaulachara can be
practiced symbolically by right-hand path initiates as well. (See figure 2.2.)
The Paths of the Hindu Sects
Pashu
Vedachara
Vcdshnavachara
Shaivachara
Dakshmachara
Vamachara
Divya
Siddhanta
Kaula
The Kulavana-tantra categorizes the viras of the Vamachara into several categories or
levels: 1) kshatriyas (characterized by boldness and indifference to danger), 2) siddhas
(who have reached a level of perfection, and who may be called “adept”), 3) kaulas (whose
“law” [kaladharma] obliterates all others).(23)
Vimalananda uses the word siddha to mean ” ..one who has achieved immortality and
supernatural powers as a result of sadhana” [spiritual practice].(24)
Concerning the kaulas Evola remarks:
Nothing is forbidden to the kaula and to those who have achieved the
condition of true siddha-vira, since they are and they know. They are lords of
their passions, and they fully identify with Shakti [power]. As the supreme
Shakti, or Parashakti, is over and beyond any pair of opposites* likewise the
kaula is beyond good and evil, honor and dishonor, merit and sin, and any
other value cherished by ordinary people, the so-called pashus.(25)
Shakti (Power) is often referred to as being “absolutely free ” and by the same token
the kaula is called svecchakari (“one who can do as he or she pleases”). Pashus, or
ordinary people, will often fear, shun or condemn the kaulas because of their behavior, or
simply for their presence.(26)
One of the significant differences between the two tantric paths, although both are
under the aegis of Shiva, is that on the right-hand path the adept always experiences
“someone above him,” even at the highest level of realization. However, on the left-hand
path the adept “becomes the ultimate sovereign” (chakravartin = world raler).(27)
In a more general sense, and in a structure reminiscent of the levels of man outlined by
the I talian Renaissance Neoplatonic philosopher Pico della Mirandola discussed in chapter
6 of this book), Vimalananda lays out three levels at which various types of humans can
exist: as a khara (donkey), a nara (“man”), or as a Narayana (“God Himself’)- The khara is
said to believe “only in the three lowest chakras” (= eating, procreating, excreting) and thai
his realm is that of abhibhautika (the mundane). The nara, or true human, is said to live
19
exclusively in the upper three chakras. It is further stated that only a few naras live in the
world at any given time. Their realm is that of the adhyatmika (the spiritual). Only a nara
can become a Narayana — and technically they are said to do this by gaining access to the
secret chakras located within in the head. (These are discussed below.) The realm in which
he narayana lives is called the adhidaivika (or “astraT).(28)
Vamacharins may be found most commonly among persons belonging to sects devoted
to the gods Ganesha, Rudra, Vishnu, Shiva, Svayambhu, Veda, Bhairava, Ksetrapala,
China, Kapalika, Pashupata, Bauddha, Kerala, Vira-Vaishnava, Sambhava, Chandra and
Aghora or to the goddesses Kali, Tara, Sundari, Bharavi, Chinnamasta, Matangi and
Vagala. Here it is wise to keep in mind that the right-hand path and left-hand path are
methods or approaches rather than sects in and of themselves.
Methods of the Hindu Left-Hand Path
Although vamacharins can be found in any of the various cults mentioned above, it is
principally in the method of worshiping The Goddess (- Varna) — in the form of a human
woman or symbols of her—that especially the male vamacharin will practice the left-hand
path. Besides meaning “left,” the Sanskrit word vama can also mean woman, or the
Goddess. (29) The real meaning behind this is that The Goddess and Woman are thought to
be the embodiments of shakti , power.(30) Here it is quite clear, at least from the masculine
perspective, that the essence of the vamachara is the total transformation of the human
initiate into something superhuman or god(dess)-like. This lies at the root of why
antinomianism (inversions of all kinds of normatives) is so important in the methodology
of eastern forms of the left-hand path.
An often overlooked aspect of both individualism and antinomianism in the Indian
systems of the left-hand path is contained in the doctrines of hatha yoga . Literally the
Sanskrit word hatha means “violence ” or ‘Violent effort,” though it has come to refer to
yogic methods which primarily focus on the physical vehicle, the human body.(31) The
practice of pure hatha yoga is said to be able to produce jivanmukti — and to give
immortality to the individualized existence by preserving “all psycho-physical
energies.”(32) The Upanishads state: “Every god is enclosed here, in the body.” The
Tantras valorize the body and individual existence: “Jiva is Sadashiva” [= Shiva in his pure
aspect of ‘being’]. In the Tantras, as in the Vedic Age, there is no contempt for the body—
on the contrary there is the enjoyment and exploration of it for the revelation of secrets it
affords.(33)
Externally, one of the chief distinguishing features between the methods of the
dakshinamarga and the vamamarga is that the dakshinacharin practices “worship through
substitutes,” while the vamacharin actualizes what is otherwise only symbolic. He may
have to participate in exercises of cruelty and other aberrations of social and religious
norms as a way of placing himself totally outside profane society. Thereby he is
“unfettered” from the bonds and tabus of society as a way of unfettering himself from
spiritual bonds. (34) (Remember the virtual identity between spiritual order and social
order, as indicated in the Indian caste system.) The methodology of the left-hand path
appears to be by far the more archaic of the two.(35)
One of the chief principles of left-hand path tantric practice is to attain liberation (here
called yoga ) while still being able to have enjoyment (bhoga). The method which makes
this possible involves the identification (smadhi) of the individual self with a higher self
while in a state of enjoyment (bhoga).(36) The Kulamava Samhita (5.219) states:
“Through enjoyment one gains liberation; for enjoyment is the means of reaching the
Supreme Abode. Hence the wise who wish to conquer [the spirit] should experience all
pleasures.”
Vimalananda alludes to a reason left-hand path practitioners do not unify with the
divinity outside himself. It is simply because they enjoy loving the divine object so much,
and being in Her company, that they control their thoughts and emotions to be able to better
enjoy the reality of the “company of the Beloved.”(37)
20
Those on the vamamarga eventually reject totally the methods and rituals of ihe
dakshinamarga as being inefficient or of no real help in their progress. They may.
however, continue to worship their deity during the day in a traditional way while they
perform rites of the vamachara at night. Night worship is often a feature of antinomian
schools.
Vimalananda distinguishes between two “ways”— that of jnana (“knowledge”) and that
of bhakti (“devotion”). In jnana the disciple is said to split from his normal body and to
self-identify with his “causal body”— and from that point on one follows the adesha
(“commands”) of an internal guru. In bhakti , on the other hand, the disciple maintains
continuous devotion to an entity conceived of as being outside the self. In discussing the
question of unity with a divinity, in this case Krishna, Vimalananda says: ‘‘But most
devotees of Krishna never want to unite with Him; they always want to maintain their own
identities so that they taste His sweetness over and over again, forever and ever.”(38)
From a left-hand path perspective Svaboda adds further that "... on the path of jnana
you actually become Shiva, while on the path of bhakti you worship but remain separate
from Krishna.”(39) The distinction is an important one, and one that must be understood
well. It seems universal in the practice of the left-hand path. On the path of jnana the
practitioner is himSelf transformed into a being of the divine typos without sacrificing his
individuated existence, whereas on the left-hand path of bhakti the practitioner seeks the
company of the divine counterpart and exists in the presence of this divinity without
unifying with it.( 40)
Antinomianism is an element found in many schools of the left-hand path throughout
the world. In each school the practice or philosophy has its own raison d’etre , but under¬
lying them all is the left-hand path imperative to transform — one’s self and one’s world. In
order to transform something, it must first be de-formed before it can be re-formed into the
willed transformed object. In order to re-construct something, that thing must be de¬
constructed. This postmodern idea is very ancient indeed.
When discussing antinomian left-handed tantrism Renou states “... we observe the
inversion of normal worship and common ethical principles. The fact that those objects are
‘worshiped’ is evidence that the stage has been passed at which they would be considered
sinf ul ”(41) So objects or practices which would normally inspire shame, hate or fear in the
orthodox ( dakshinachara ) Hindu will be willfully worshipped and engaged in with a
sublimated attitude of sacrality— in order to cut the so-called three knots of shame-hate-
fear. “The fundamental principle of the left-hand path is that spiritual progress cannot be
achieved by falsely shunning our desires and passions, but by sublimating those very
aspects which make one fall, as a means of liberation ”(42)
According to Danielou the Kulamave Tantra [625] informs us that “‘the lord-of tears’
(Rudra) has shown in the left-hand doctrine that spiritual advancement is best achieved by
means of those very things which are the causes of man’s downfall ”(43)
In discussing the Kulavana-tantra Evola further relates that the work of the
vira on the path to becoming a divya consists of icchashuddhi (“purification of the will”).
This pure will is characterized as being naked, transcendent, capable of self-determination,
beyond all antithetical values and all pairs of opposites. In the practice of icchashuddhi the
following eight bonds or fetters must be broken systematically: day a “sympathy,” moha
“delusion,” lajja “shame” or “the idea of sin,” bhaya “fear,” ghrina “disgust,” kula “family,
kinship, clan,” vama “caste,” sila “customary rites and precepts ”(44) As each of these
bonds or fetters is broken the vira becomes progressively more liberated.
In many ways this technique of icchashuddhi is reminiscent of Anton LaVey’s
injunction that his followers should indulge in the “seven deadly sius” of Christianity —
greed, pride, envy, anger, gluttony, lust and sloth — in order to liberate themselves
similarly from the conditionings of modem western civilization.(45)
Part of the reason why such techniques are considered effective in Hindu practice is that
we are now living in what is called a Kali Yuga — a phase of history characterized by
21
materialism and a lack of interest in spiritual matters. In this kind of age ‘passion alone,
when astutely directed, can overcome egoism and pride and solid calculation. Alone it has
the momentum to draw man away from the bonds that chain him to his interests, his
beliefs”(46)
The real importance of antinomianism lies in how it relates to the individual soul
{jivatman) and how it is to be transformed into a divine being. This is effected by the union
of the personality with its personal divinity, the jivatman itself. The limitations, or bonds,
placed on the jiva (self) both internally and externally. Merger of the Self with the jivatman
is impossible so long as the eight bonds constrict the will of the vira.
Although in the tantric context none of this can be equated with crude “egotism” an
element of a “divine egoism” can be discerned in the teaching that the western face of
Shiva, which is red, and which is called Vamadeva (“Left-handed Deity”) is equated with
“I-ness,” the ahamkara, which is associated with fire, sight and action.(47)
Such radical individualism is essential to the character of the left-hand path. Svaboda
relates that seekers should “...try to redirect their urge to individuation from Maya
[unconsciousness/objectivity] to Chit [consciousness/subjectivity]” and should not allow
themselves “to be carried along by the current of their lives and of their neighbors’
lives.”(48) He further states: “Aghoris never permit themselves to be passively defined by
the external environment; they define themselves and by so doing define their
surroundings.”(49) In a way reminiscent of the cosmo-psychological system of laws taught
by G.I. Gurdjieff, Svaboda also relates:
...all of us are part of the manifested universe, subject to its laws until we
develop the power to redefine ourselves in other terms. A Tantric aims to
become sva-tantra (“self-functioning”), to be free of all limitations,
including especially the limitations of his or her own personality.(50)
The theme of the creative aspect of the practice of the left-hand path will be noticeable in
many schools around the world and throughout history. The practice of the left-hand path
is not simply a matter of finding a “program” and working with it— on the leftward way
one does not worship a god but rather one enacts divinity from a subjective perspective.
When describing the development of doctrines within Aghora, Svaboda says: “... precepts
[are] engraved not on tablets of stone but on the heart of the individual practitioner who
must use them to create an individual system, thereby carving his or her own spiritual
niche.”(51)
Antinomianism includes the notion of (especially for men) Goddess “worship.” The
vamacharin does not merely worship the Goddess in the form of a woman, but he himself
seeks to become a woman. This may have its roots in a historical development in which
men took over the priesthood function from women, and thus to practice that function with
its timeless authority the men had to “become women.” In support of this idea are facts
such as practices in which priests wear feminine robes to certain rites, or the myths and
legends which show men transforming themselves into women. (52) This may be true on a
historical level. However, there is a more profound and eternal, ahistorical principle of
which these practices and beliefs may also be reflections. In Indian (and perhaps Indo-
European) lore the structure or essence of a subtle or spiritnal body attached to or contained
within the physical body is thought to be feminine— at least for men. That is, there is a
spiritual entity of the opposite sex within each person. (This is echoed in the lore of Iran,
with its farvashis, and in Scandinavia, with itsfylgjur, hamingjur , etc., not to mention the
highly sympathetic modem psychology of C. G. Jung.) In the Indian system we also learn
many technical details demonstrating why and how this is so. The seven major padmas
(lotuses) or chakras (wheels) are said to be the seven seats of femininity inherent in every
human being— each of these is the seat of a shakti (power) which is, of course, also
feminine in nature.(53) So by awakening these shaktis and activating the padmas or
22
chakras (through the force of kundalini , serpent force, also feminine) the vamacharin
slowly (or quickly) transforms himself into the Goddess within and thus “becomes a
woman.” He has undergone a transformation into his “opposite.”
In a left-hand path context the aghori sage Vimalananda relates that the aim of kundalini
yoga is to reunite Shiva and Shakti, in order to re-create Shiva in his eternal form as
(Sadashiva). “Sadashiva’s left side is female and right side is male; the two principles have
united but have not merged. If they were to merge that would be the end of the play [lila],
and that would be no fun at all.”(54) Here it should be carefully noted that Vimalananda
subtly distinguishes between union and merger. His ultimate reason for wanting to avoid
merger hinges on the pleasure he would lose if such a merger were to occur.
The essential principle behind how the kundalini shakti (serpent-power) is caused to
rise in the body depends on the ability to reverse the ordinary or usual (i.e. natural) flow-
patterns of force in the body. The prana-energy, which naturally flows upward and inward
in the body is made to flow downward and outward, and the apana-e nergy, which
ordinarily flows downward and/or outward is caused to flow upward or outward. When
these two meet, contrary to their normal paradigm of motion, it is said that they “kiss,” and
it is then that kundalini shakti begins to rise. Here it is clear that “antinomianism” in the
tantric system has extended itself even into the realm of esoteric physiology.
In the usual, or right-hand path, practice of kundalini yoga the purpose is to reach the
sahasrara chakra above the head. But it seems that from left-hand path perspective the pint
is only to raise the serpent power to the sixth chakra, or anja-chakra (“command-center'’)—
and from there to enter into the three hidden chakras. These are the secret chakras of go lata,
lalata and lalana located on the uvula at he back of the throat, above the anja chakra and
within the soft palate respectively. The aghori or left-hand path tantric will not merge with
the sahasrara wherein all discrimination between this and that, between *T and “not-I,” or
‘T and ‘Thou” disappear would disappear. But, as Vimalananda would say, that would be
no fun.
Vamacharins are actually known to engage in various practices considered nefarious by
more orthodox dakshinacharins. Among the aghora sects, for example, acts of necrophilia
and cannibalism are known. These and other practices are not engaged in for perverse
pleasure, but rather they are dependent on the fact that they represent deep seated cultural
and religious taboos. It is by breaking these taboos and going beyond the barriers of good
and evil that the aghora attains new levels of power and “liberation” (from his human
limitations).
The word aghora literally means “the Non-Fearful,” and this quality is equated with the
southern face of the five-faced Shiva. This face is blue-black in color, and embodies the
principle-of-intellect (buddhi tattva ) or eternal law (dharma).(55)
More usual than engaging in these extreme forms, however, are the milder practices of
sexual mysticism. Many of these are meant to break down social, sexual, as well as dietary
taboos. ‘Tantrism” has been used as a synonym for “sexual magic” in the west since the
appearance of popular treatments of the subject in the 1960s and 1970s. There is much
more to the tantric tradition than sexual mysticism, but especially the left-hand tantrics do
make actual sexual rituals a part of their practices.(56)
The most essential form of sexual mysticism is contained in the rite called
panchamakara (“five-M’s”). This is described in the Kalivilasa Tantra (X-XI), but there
warning is also given that it must be practiced only with initiated women. The “five-M’s”
refer to five elements used in the ritual, the Sanskrit names for all of which begin with the
letter “M;” matsya, fish; mams a, meat; madya, intoxicating drink; mudra , cereal; and
maithuna, coitus.
On the right-hand path substitute substances are traditionally used: incense, food,
sandalwood, a lamp and flowers. In either case there is a regular correspondence to die five
traditional Hindu elements, or tattvas : aether, water, earth, fire and air respectively.
23
In a typical performance of the panchamakara on the left-hand path the two celebrants
partake of the four food items before entering into an act of sexual yoga. These elements
have been described as aphrodisiacs, and they are also usually considered taboo substances
(generally thought to be profane by the orthodox Hindus) which have been sacralized
through mental discipline and tantric practice. In other words, the substances and acts in¬
volved in the panchamakara are usually thought to be instruments of bondage , and there¬
fore to be counterproductive to liberation— but the left-hand path practitioner uses these
substances and experiences for the purpose of raising kundalini and is not used by them.
Another important variation of the sexual ritual is the rite known as chakra puja (circle
worship). Here a whole group of tantrics engage in a sexual ritual in which men and
women are paired by chance. One way of doing this is by the women throwing their
bodices ( choli) into a basket and having each of the men take a bodice from the receptacle.
The woman to whom that bodice belongs will be his ritual partner for the night— be that
woman his wife, sister, mother, or whatever. The participants will all sit in a circle,
alternating male/female, with the man’s partner always sitting on his left. This is the
probable origin of the term “left -hand path ” and also shows the ritual correlation between
woman and left. In the middle of the circle a single girl — usually very young — is
worshipped by the chief officiating priest. The rite, which lasts for several hours, ends in a
collective panchamakara. (57)
These and similar tantric rites are not as straightforward to interpret as they might seem
at first. An important element in their functioning clearly seems to be the idea of
antinomianism— the sanctification of the profane. But the attitude of erotic enjoyment
evident in advanced practices seems to indicate that this is not a continuing factor. The
original magical or psychologically transformative aspect might have been the overcoming
of inhibition and the breaking of conventional taboos, but once this stage is past the
activities continue in a new re-sacralized sense. The fact that the relatively mild sexual and
dietary taboos have beeu broken may contribute to the practices of more extreme sects
which seek to push back even stronger taboos. Some sects reinterpret the five-M’s to mean
me ha, urine; mamsa, human flesh; mala, excrement; medha, juice (i.e. blood); and tnehana ,
penis (i.e. semen). But perhaps in keeping with the two poles or schools within the left-
hand path, there are also those at the other extreme who interpret these “five essentials”
( panchatattvas ) not as carnal realities, but as spiritual symbols. Always the overriding
factor seems to be the idea of a Nietzschean Umwertung alter Werte — a re-valuation of all
values. Barriers are broken, social and psychological chaos created, out of which a new,
revivified, renewed and transformed order can emerge according to the will of the tantric.
Commonly the left-hand path tantric is said to be able to ingest poisons — perhaps
symbolic of substances which hinder liberation — with nothing but beneficial results. This
is made possible once the tantric has become [a] Shiva, that is realized his real Self or
Soul, he possesses the power of Shiva to convert everything which he ingests into amrita
(the divine nectar of immortality, or non-death). (5 8) The magical principle transforming or
“purifying” any substance or experience to serve the purposes of the pure Will of the
magician is typical at all levels of die left-hand path.
Another important vamachara technique which involves the reversal of norms or natural
tendencies is that of the control of the flow of semen. On the surface this appears to be one
of those many magico-technical aspects only tangential to the purpose of thus study. But the
rationale behind it, if not the philosophical sophistication or actual objective effectiveness,
is an important left-hand path statement
Among tantrics semen is thought of as the essence of Shiva,(59) and as long as they are
able to retain it or reabsorb it they will have immortality. In esoteric tantric physiology it is
conceptualized that the semen, or the spiritual component of it (Skt bindu), has its origin in
the crown chakra sahasram and is normally and naturally transmitted downward through a
subtle artery (nadi) and ejaculated and lost. This loss is a loss of power, self-hood, and
life.(60)
24
It then becomes the task of the tantric adept to reverse the natural process in seme
so that he can retain and reabsorb this spiritual substance. So the tantric may arrest oe
ejaculation, causing the bindu to rise again in reverse direction back to the crown of tbs
head nourishing and empowering self-hood and immortality. Or a similar effect may be
gained by ejaculating into the yoni (vulva) and then drawing it back up through the penis
and up the subtle nadi to the crown chakra. It is also possible to ingest orally the “fallen^
bindu.(61) Similar beliefs were perhaps held by certain Gnostic sects in which there was
often talk of the “power to reverse the river Jordan ”(62)
In Hindu tantrism the importance of actual worship of Shakti in the form of womankind
and the physical vulva makes it more likely that practices involving emission of semen and
its mixture with female emissions before reabsorption takes place are more common than in
Buddhistic tantrism.(6 3)
What is important here is the left-hand path technique or philosophical model of inverting
or reversing natural processes through the power of will and consciousness. By being able
to reverse natural “flow patterns,” be they in the body (subjective) or in the world
(objective), practitioners of the left-hand path demonstrate or exercise their independence
from the natural universe— thus establishing that which is divine in their individualities
(jivatman). This it seems is the central philosophical and magical statement underlying the
machinations of the tantric semen cult.
The concept of the sovereign power of a “lord” is highly consistent with the Hindu
terminology surrounding those called mahapurushas or “great-souled” ones. These exist in
four grades or levels of power: 1) siddha “an immortal one of special ability,” 2) nath
“master” 3) muni (or mount) “silent one,” and4) rishi “seer.”(64)
The vamamarga appears to be a path consistent with Hinduism’s most archaic roots and
to be a logical flowering of certain aspects of Indo-European thought. The development of
the individual self ( jivatman ) to the level of a divinity — and the maintenance of that level
of being for eternity — never seeking the final liberation or total annihilation of the
individual self in the universal self {parcunatman or brahman ) is the clear goal of the original
vitality of Indo-European thought
The Left-Hand Path in Buddhism
In Buddhism the position of the left-hand path is more philosophically paradoxical, but
in fact and practice it is perhaps no less prevalent than in Hinduism. The reason the
Buddhist left-hand path is paradoxical is that the very foundation of Buddhism lies on the
basis that there is no individual self— that such a concept is only an illusion created by the
mind. The Hindu holds that the self does exist, as do the gods and goddesses. The
Buddhists original denial of these assertions, as well as their rejection of the ultimate
validity of the Vedas , are the main reasons they were themselves rejected as heretics in
India. Originally Buddhism was not so much a religion as it was a technique or method of
“enlightenment.” or the realization of the nirvanic state. Historically many elements have
accrued to the Buddhist method as it adapted itself to local cults and social conditions
throughout Asia.
The historical Siddhartha Gautama, called the Buddha (“Awakened One”), died in 544
bce. He was an Indian (Aryan) prince of a Ksatriya (warrior) tribe paradoxically using a
Brahmanic clan name— Gautama, “descendant of the sage Gotama. Siddharta established a
radical teaching for gaining enlightenment. This teaching is based on the so-called Four
Noble Truths: 1) life is inherently full of suffering (Pali dukka), 2) that suffering is due to
craving (Pali tanha\ 3) suffering can be stopped by “eradication of craving” (Pali nibbana,
Skt nirvana ), 4) “eradication of craving” can be achieved by following the Noble Eightfold
Path (Pali ariyd) This Eightfold Path consists of: 1) right understanding, 2) right thinking,
3) right speech, 4) right action, 5) right livelihood, 6) right effort, 7) right mindfulness
(contemplation), 8) right meditation (one pointedness of mind). By following the Eightfold
Path the practitioner will gain the awakened state of Buddha-hood.
25
Buddhism at this level is a highly developed and sophisticated doctrine which
epitomizes the right-hand path. The root of this can be easily understood by analyzing the
first of the Four Noble Truths. In a chain of causation, sorrow is equated with ignorance,
ignorance causes imagination, imagination causes consciousness of self, which causes
embodied existence, which gives rise to the senses, which cause perception. Perceptions
cause emotion, emotion causes craving ( tanha ), craving causes attachment (to the things
craved), attachment leads to becoming, which leads to rebirth— the principal phenomenon
equated with “suffering” in both Hindu and Buddhist traditions. The ignorance which
started the whole chain in motion is equated with an ignorance of the nature of the universe,
that it is full of sorrow (< dukka ), instability or becoming (anicca), and “lack of self’ {anatta).
If Buddhists had remained true to those fundamental philosophical stances and practices,
there could be no talk of a Buddhist left-hand path.
The most “orthodox” — or simplest — school of Buddhism has come to be referred to
as Theravada (“teaching of the elders”), and is strongest in southern Buddhism in Sri
Lanka and southeastern Asia. But beginning around the 1st - 2nd centuries ce learned
monks began to develop a more esoteric tradition which came to be known as the mahayana
(“greater vehicle”). In this context Theravada is often referred to as the hinayana (“lesser
vehicle”). Mahayana. eventually came to dominate in the north, in Tibet, China and Japan.
The orthodox view is that each person is fully responsible for his own enlightenment and
that the realm of bliss, nirvana , is fully separate from the realm of illusion, or maya (the
phenomenal world).
There was a tendency in mahayana to bridge the gap of absolute separateness between
nirvana and maya. One way was found in the doctrine of the boddhisattva , “one bound for
awakening.” A boddhisattva was a near perfected being who could effect the enlightenment
or development of less awakened people through a kind of magical intervention from his
ascended state. (This doctrine, as found in Tibetan Buddhism, is apparently the main
source for later ideas of “unknown superiors ” “secret chiefs,” and mahatmas found in
certain Masonic, quasi-masonic and Theosophical schools in the west)
Philosophically a certain school within the mahayana (called madhyamika) claimed that
in fact there was no difference between maya and nirvana — both were equally void (sunya-
ta) or alternately that the phenomenal world {maya) exists only in the mind of the perceiver.
These ideas might remind the reader of the “sense data” theories of the British
philosophers George Berkeley (1685-1753) and David Hume (1711-1776), whose
application of empiricism led them to conclude that we can only know the subjective
contents of our minds as fed by impressions made upon them by the senses. The “reality”
of the world outside our minds is uncertain. Already in ancient times the epistemologies of
Hinduism and Buddhism had passed through the radical stages of subjective observation
that would only be possible in the west after the demise of the intellectual hegemony of
Christianity. (See chapter 6.)
The most striking development within the mahayana is the emergence of the vajrayana
(“thunderbolt or diamond vehicle”), especially prevalent in Tibet. Philosophically, the
vajrayana is virtually synonymous with Tibetan Buddhist tantrism. Thus, if maya = nirvana
then indulgence in the phenomenal world can lead to the world of bliss. Maya is used to
attain nirvana . In practical terms this opens the way to antinomianism. “Profane” things are
made “pure” as an exercise of the mind Vajrayana is heavily influenced on a philosophical
and practical level by Indian (Hindu) tantrism, indigenous Tibetan religion (Bon), and
central Asian shamanism. Again in an antinomian spirit the over-culture absorbs techniques
from the under-culture.
In Buddhism, as in Hinduism, the left-hand path ends not in the absorption or
annihilation of individuality in moksha or nirvana but in a perpetuation of that individuality
on a more permanent plane of existence. Within Buddhist terminology, the practitioner of
the left-hand path aims to attain only to the boddhisattvic state— and to remain there as a
deity— “angelic” or “demonic.” The final annihilation is resisted.
26
Of course, when we look at the original Buddhist teachings, such aims are theoretically
antithetical to the very premise of Buddhism. But in the history of religious ideas such
contradictions often arise. Who would think, for example, that the teachings of the
Nazarene, as reported in the Gospels, could be used to support such institutions as the
Crusades and the Inquisition? So it is not surprising that Buddhism would develop within
itself patterns out of synch with the founder’s original intentions. Over the 1500 years
following Gautama’s death Buddhism spread from India in a largely peaceful way
throughout the cultures of southeastern Asia, China, Tibet, Mongolia and Japan. With this
kind of cultural diversity as its matrix, it is certainly no wonder that teachings at odds with
those of the founder took root in the religious soil called Buddhism.
Left-hand path tantrism seems to have had various epicenters of development in the
Buddhist world. Principal among these were Tibet and Bengal (present-day Bangladesh).
In this latter region Buddhism was eventually driven out by Muslim conquest starting about
1200 CE, and from there it spread to Java and up to Nepal.
Methods of Left-Hand Path Bnddhism
One of the chief aspects of left-hand path Buddhism is its positive attitude toward
sexuality. The left-hand path Buddhist accepts certain Shakta ideas that the creative energy
or “potency” of a deity, angel, demon, or boddhisattva is personified as his wife or
consort. In the left-hand path Buddhist tantra the shaktis , or female aspects of
supermundane entities, are worshipped as lovers. The Buddhist tantrik seeks sexual union
with these shaktis in order to draw on their power and to use the power gained from such
unions for further spiritual development. Another chief feature of left-hand path tantric
Buddhism is the utilization not only of “deities” or “angels,” i.e. entities considered
generally beneficent, but also of “demons” and their consorts. The god Bhairava (“the
Terrible”) is worshipped, and elaborate rites are performed in burial grounds. Also, sexual
intercourse and other activities considered immoral by the general population are utilized as
practices which lead to spiritual development or salvation. (65)
The Buddhist left-hand path tantrism holds that the passions and desires which the
right-hand path seeks either to annihilate or sublimate can be utilized in their direct
unsublimated forms as vehicles for “awakening.”
Evans-Wentz cites the following technical instructions from the Tibetan Buddhist text
called the “Epitome of the Great Symbol” (87-88):
87. Whatever thoughts, or concepts, or obscuring [or disturbing] passions
arise are neither to be abandoned nor allowed to control one; they are to be
allowed to arise without one’s trying to direct [or shape] them. If one do no
more than merely to recognize them as soon as they arise, and persist in so
doing, they will come to be realized [or to dawn] in their true [or void] form
through not being abandoned.
88. By that method, all things which may seem to be obstacles to
spiritual growth can be made use of as aids on the Path. And therefore, the
method is called “Hie u tilizin g of obstacles as aids on the Palh.”(66)
Left-hand path Buddhism, like so many other expressions of the left-hand path in the
world, eschews institutional forms and socially acceptable norms. It tends more in the
direction of individualized expression and socially unacceptable behaviors.
In actual sexual practice the male Buddhist left-hand path tantric is more likely to retain
his seminal fluid totally, or having ejaculated it, to reingest it in its entirety orally. The
retention of seed (Skt bija ) is tantamount to retaining power and vitality— both physical
and mental. Also, it seems although there might be a generally more spiritually positive
attitude toward sexuality and womankind in Buddhist left-hand path tantrism, there is still
the fear that women, and especially female demonic entities, can vampirize men of their
vital spiritual powers.(67)
27
In philosophical terms, the Buddhist left-hand path concentrates more on a subjective
— intrapsychic — process. The Buddhist view would be that such polarities as implied by
the male/female dichotomy (or that of the right-hand/left-hand path) are illusory creations of
the mind of the individual Practices are engaged in to demonstrate this illusory aspect The
Buddhist left-hand path practitioner will tend to create his own subjective internally
complete and closed system, whereas the Hindu left-hand path practitioner will tend to
acknowledge as real the objective existence of the Goddess (Shaktf),
Practitioners who hold that the realm of the five senses is purely a construct of the mind
and in reality the product of illusion (maya) may often rely on what appears to non-initiates
to be chicanery and tricks involving slight of hand. If the world we see before us is an
illusion, then the magician is pointing this out to us not by means of philosophical
discourse, but by means of a direct attack on those senses and the ways they (mis-)inform
the mind. Thus, what may at first glance appear to be an attempt at deception or trickery is
in fact conceived of as the most direct method of teaching about the central fact (from a
Buddhist perspective) that the world is a creation of the mind— a much more entertaining
approach to the problems addressed by Plato’s “Myth of the Cave .”(68)
Because of the long-standing and continuing proliferation of doctrines and sects within
both Hindu and Buddhist tantra/shakta no unifying or definitive summary of either what
they believe or practice, or final conclusion on what distinguishes them, can be reached
with certainty. It only seems certain that the desire for continued — if continually
transformed—individuality, and lack-of-annihilation, are universal (even if often obscured
in actual texts of the left-hand path Tantras).
The influence of the left-hand path as practiced by philosophies based on Indian-
derived systems — both Hindu and Buddhist — on the modem western forms of the left-
hand path has been enormous. Historically, it would seem that this influence came in at
least two great waves. The first came perhaps with the opening of cultural channels
between “east” and “west” occasioned by the conquests of Alexander (d. 323 bce).
Following this time there was a flood of ideas from the “east” (India and Iran) which
formed and reformed sects in the Mediterranean region. These in turn exercised a
secondary influence on India with Christian missions (often gnostic in character) beginning
in the first century ce.( 69) The second wave of influence from the eastern left-hand path is
better documented. In essence it came originally as a result of another “conquest” from the
west— the extension of the British Empire into India (be ginnin g in the 18th century). As
the west was again increasingly exposed to ideas stemming from India and Tibet eventually
this filtered down to a more popular level of culture where it emerged in forms such as the
Theosophical Society (founded 1875) and the Ordo Templi Orientis (founded 1896 or
1904). In both instances, as discussed in chapter 7, doctrines of left-hand path Hinduism
and Buddhism played significant roles.
The forms of sexual magic taught by Aleister Crowley and his followers as well as the
antinomian chicanery practiced by Anton LaVey have analogs in the left- han d p ath practices
of India.
Zoroastrianism and the Left-Hand Path
No system of thought shaped the classical form of western left-hand path mythology
more than Zoroastrianism. The idea that there is a whole hierarchy of the forces of good
arrayed as if in a battle against a hierarchy of the forces of evil came to the west from
Iranian religion (in one form or another) through Judaism or Gnosticism in some cases—
or perhaps directly into the heathen north in other cases.(See chapter 3.) Originally the
Iranian religious system differed little from the Vedic system of India. This is because the
Aryans and Iranians are merely stems of the same branch of the Indo-European tree of
cultures and religions.
Because the Iranian systems have lent themselves so much to western left-hand path
mythology, and because they are themselves often so dualistic and concerned with matters
of good versus evil, it is all the more surprising that when one analyzes the systems there is
28
very little underlying tension over the essential philosophical questions which differentiate
the left-hand path from the right-hand path both east and west. Iranian systems seem to
have characteristics which in some way or another belong to the left-hand path!
The study of Iranian religion is complex and obscured by the fact that the cultural basis
and epicenter of it was destroyed by the Muslim conquest of Iran over a thousand years
ago. Many Zoroastrians escaped to India (the Parsis) where they continue the religion, and
some non-Islamic practitioners of various forms of Iranian religion (including
Zoroastrianism) have survived in Iran to this day. But their schools of sophisticated
thonght have long since been shattered.
Zoroaster (or Zarathustra), who probably lived around the time 500 bce,(70) was
essentially a reformer of the Iranian religion as practiced by various tribal groups. He was
himself trained as a priest or motor of this sacnficial religion. Even before Zoroaster the
Iranian system had developed highly dualistic tendencies(71) which would continually find
expression in Iranian religions both within Zoroastrianism and outside it. Zoroaster’s
reforms seem to have been aimed at creating a moralistic dualism within a theoretically
“monotheistic” system. Zoroaster’s chief opponents in his efforts were the ultra-
conservative representatives of the old Indo-Iranian order— the mairyas organized in
haenas or “men’s’ societies.” This appears to be a logical opposition as monotheism would
tend to divest the ruling class of its power and invest that power in a single ruler or Shah.
The haenas were the repositories of archaic religious practice and culture. They
practiced animal sacrifice (especially of horses and cattle), and drank a holy intoxicating
liquid ( haoma , cf. Skt. soma). They were a society of horse-riding warriors who were
accompanied on their ways by a troop of women called jahikas or jahis , who sometimes
fonght along side the warriors, but who were certainly the concubines of the men. On the
spiritual level these jahis were reflected by the farvashis who were the protective and
empowering souls of the warriors. The word jahi later became the name of the chief
demoness of the Zoroastrians, Jahi or Jeh— “the Whore.”
The religion of the mairyas was certainly one based on life and the preservation and
continuation of life and the glories of the individual soul. As the “prophet” Zoroaster saw
them, these bands must have seemed the very incarnations of the evil mini ons of Ahriman.
They wore black leather (although they fought naked from the waist up), bore black
weapons and flew a black flag emblazoned with silver dragons. Their hair was long and
they wore it in braids. In their initiation rites they were known, like members of other Indo-
European warrior bands, to don the skins of wolves— thereby transforming themselves
into the likeness of wolves. Also they made use of a magical fury called aeshma.{12)
This aeshma is doubly interesting to us because on the one hand it is a close parallel to
the magical fury or inspiration (wod-) attained by the Germanic warrior/magicians under
the leadership of their god Wod-an-az (Woden/Odin), while the word aeshma also found its
way into the Judeo-Chnstian demonic lore in the form of Aeshma-daeva (the god/demon of
fury). The Iranian form Aeshmadaeva eventually became Asmodeus.
Zoroaster vilified the religious culture of the warrior societies, and many of his reforms
seem aimed at correcting what he saw as excesses in their practices and in their violent
natures. Essentially his reforms consisted of a replacement of most (if not all) of the gods
(daevas) of the traditional Iranian pantheon with hierarchies of personifications of largely
abstract entities or principles (yazatas )
In Zoroaster’s theology there is one god who is absolutely wise and purely good, but
not all-powerful. He is called Ahura Mazda (“Wise Lord”). He created through Thought a
hierarchy of all-seeing spirits. In fact he created a whole good universe, called menok. It is
said that Ahura Mazda chose the Good of his own free will.(73) This clearly implies that
somehow beyond the gods there is a system of morality to which they themselves are
subject. Among the creatures Ahura Mazda engenders are the twins Spenta Mainyu
(Beneficent Mind) and Angra Mainyu (Destroying Mind). Angra Mainyu, exercising his
own free will, for the first time chose evil instead of good. The very existence of Angra
29
Mainyu in effect limited the good of Ahura Mazda. Angra Mainyu then began to plan an
attack on the good creation of Ahura Mazda (who in some accounts is virtually identified
with Spenta Mainyu). But Ahura Mazda with his all-seeing wisdom sees Angra Mainyu’s
plan and in defence of his pre-existing spiritual universe (menok), he created from its
pattern a material universe (getik). This material universe is created by Ahura Mazda as a
weapon or shield against Angra Mainyu. The later systems of Gnosis which contrived to
make the material universe the creation of the “evil god” would have been highly heretical
to Zoroaster himself.
In some accounts it is said that Angra Mainyu began a counter creation in which he
made monsters (such as wolves and spiders) for each beautiful creature Ahura Mazda had
fashioned (such as dogs and eagles). Other accounts have it that Angra Mainyu began to
possess or indwell in the good creations of Ahura Mazda— corrupting them.
But what has Angra Mainyu — known as Ahriman in later sources — really done but
give Ahura Mazda the licence he needs to extend his power limitlessly while only acting
morally in defence of his good creation? Here it is seen that Angra Mainyu actually —
unconsciously and involuntarily — collaborates in Ahura Mazda’s plans of perfection. So
Angra Mainyu can be seen as an example of “evil” which promotes the cause of good—
just as Goethe’s Mephistopheles says of himself:
Ich bin ein Teil von jener Kraft ,
die stets das Bose will und stets das Gute schafft.
I am a part of that force that would
always desire the evil, yet always work the good.
(J. W. von Goethe, Faust I, Scene 5)
In the orthodox Zoroastrian system, mankind is exhorted — in imitation of Ahura
Mazda — to choose the good always as a matter of free will. In so doing the evil
machinations of Ahriman will be thwarted. Mankind is seen as the chief battle gronnd
between good and evil— and mankind is seen as the fulcrum on which the fate of the world
is balanced.
The Zoroastrians were by no means immediately successful in their efforts to reform
the Iranian religion and their system does not appear to become the official religion of the
court of the Shah, Darius, until around 522 bce — approximately a millennium after the
death of Zoroaster himself.(74)
Zoroaster lived and his system flourished most in eastern Iran (on the eastern side of
the Zagros mountains)— but the various Iranian Empires (from around 800 bce) and the
realm of Iranian cultural influence spread through Mesopotamia into Asia Minor (present-
day Turkey). In the western part of die Persian Empire the cult of the magus (sing, magu,
priest) remained strong and resisted Zoroastrian influence. Magu is the ultimate source of
the term “magician.” It was also Latinized as the singular magus (pi. magi ) and used to
designate hig&y initiated (and ostensibly wise) practitioners of sorcery. As time went on,
however, the cult of the magus became progressively more influenced by Zoroastrian ideas
until they eventually came to be identified (by outsiders) as Zoroastrian priests.
In fact pre-Zoroastrian religious systems continued to flourish throughout this time both
inside and outside the Persian empire— and some say they still persist. In any event, the
native Iranian beliefs — forms of daeva- worship — are certainly known to have still
existed in the mountainous region of Sogdia at the time of the Islamic conquest which took
from 636 to 800 CE to complete.
The principal pre-Zoroastrian systems, which nevertheless began to include Zoroastrian
elements over time (just as Zoroastrianism incorporated pre-Zoroastrian elements), were
Zurvanism and Mithraism.
30
Zurvan is an Iranian deity embodying infinite time and destiny. According to the
Zurvanites, Zurvan is the “father” of both Ohrmazd and Ahriman. This conception is
apparently extremely ancient, perhaps even pre-dating Zoroaster’s system.(75) It is
probably in the system of Zurvanism that the idea of the moral dualism preached in
Zoroaster’s theology finds expression in a dualism expressed between spirit (as a
manifestation of good) and matter (as a manifestation of evil). It can not be over
emphasized that the spirit - good/matter = evil ideology is not Zoroastrian. It is an extreme
heresy in orthodox Zoroastrianism to believe such a thing— although it does seem to be an
Iranian idea. In Zurvanism Ahura Mazda (Ohrmazd) is reduced to a creature of Zurvan—
which again is heretical for orthodox Zoroastrians.
Zurvan
In the Zurvanite system, the god Mithra (Vedic Mitra) is seen as a mediator between
Ohrmazd and Ahriman. In Mithra we see another persistent manifestation of the pre-
Zoroastrian religion throughout the history of Iranian religion and religious systems
derived from Ir anian thought. The Mithraic cult was strong for a long time among the
magus of the western Persian Empire— especially around the Black Sea. It is clearly a non-
Zoroastrian warrior oriented mystery cult. (76) A close study of Mithraism reveals that it is
a sophisticated system developed from the religion of the warrior bands (haenas) of early
Iranian culture. This is often eclectically mixed with elements from religions and mystery
cults with which the Mithraists came into contact When the Romans came into contact with
this cult (after the middle of the 1st century CE) it spread among soldiers throughout the
Roman Empire.
Mithraism, as opposed to other common forms of Iranian religion, is remarkably free
of dualistic thinking. It seems to be a highly developed survival of the old Iranian warrior
cult Mithras, who in some respects resembled another culture hero also bom on 25
December, achieved salvation through the sacrifice of a bull. Eventually this bull-sacrifice
cult lost out to the human-sacrifice cult of Christianity.
From the standpoint of orthodox Zoroastrian religion, both Zurvanism and Mithraism
represent heretical, “evil” paths of darkness. Zurvanism both because it sees Ohrmazd as a
subordinate to Zurvan and Ahriman as the complete equal of Ohrmazd, and because it
reduces the material universe to a creation of the evil god. Mithraism is heretical and evil
because in it one of the old gods ( daevas ), Mithras, is worshipped. What is more, he is
worshipped at night (which in itself constitutes an evil act of “devil worship” among
orthodox Zoroastrians) and he is a warrior god who sacrifices a cosmic bull to create the
world— which is reminiscent of the sacrificial cult of the old Iranian haenas. The followers
of Mithras take part in that sacrifice, becoming themselves creators.
Zoroastrianism and the Iranian religious systems in general have exerted tremendous,
sometimes formative, influences on religious and magical traditions around them. These
systems originated such important historical religious ideas as the strict dualism between
the forces of good and the forces of evil, the idea of the coming of a world savior
(Saoshyant) at the end of a linear stretch of time, the notion of all souls being judged— the
good going to Paradise (from the Iranian word pairi-daeza , “a walled in garden or park”),
the wicked to a realm of punishment, and the idea of the resurrection (or reconstruction and
reanimation) of the physical bodies of the dead in a renewed world. In fact two of the most
important Judeo-Christian myths are Iranian in origin: Certain aspects of Eden (Gen. 1-2)
and the nativity of Jesus (Mat. 2:1-12).
31
The symbolic complex of the first man and woman (together with a malevolent female
figure) and the tree of Paradise in conjunction with a serpent definitely seems to originate in
Judaism (and hence Christianity) from Iranian sources. (77) While these symbols have been
present in the near east for millennia, it is most likely that they entered into Hebrew
mythology following the time of the Jewish liberation from Babylon in 539 bce. After that
time, until the conquest of Alexander in 332 bce, Israel was part of the Persian Empire.
More obviously of Iranian — and specifically “magian” or Mithraic origin — is the
myth of the Nativity of Jesus Christ In the Iranian (Mithric) lore it was believed that the
future Redeemer-King of the world would be bom in a cave and that this would be
signalled by a “star or column of light” shining above the cave. This explains why the three
magoi (magus) are said to have visited the Christ child in the accounts given in die Gospel
of Matthew. (78)
Often the Yezidis, another Iranian people, are thought to be related to left-hand path
ideas. It is just as likely as not that the original impetus and essence of that sect is Iranian
(the Yezidis are Kurds, an Iranian people). Also, the apparent fact that they give some sort
of honor to the god normally associated with evil, and that he is already been, or will be,
forgiven by god, is consistent with heterodox Iranian beliefs.(79) I treat the Yezidis in
more detail in chapter 4.
In the final analysis it seems virtually impossible to classify any of the systems of
Iranian thought as either right-hand path or left-hand path according to die criteria set out in
this study. This is because although there is usually a strong polarity between good and evil
in these systems, the good is not a matter of following the Law of God, or in seeking self-
annihilation either literally or as a by-product of “doing God’s will,” but rather it is doing
or choosing the Good which the god himself must also seek to choose. The Good seems to
be an objective construct comparable to the Platonic agathon. The individualities of the
good ones are not annihilated— but preserved and even resurrected in physical reality.
Because the “east” has historically been able to preserve more or less intact the full range
of religious “paths” envisioned and practiced by humanity, and because sages and
magicians have consciously worked these methods out in an atmosphere of relative
philosophical toleration, the methods and vocabulary of both paths seem more precise
there. Much of the dichotomy between the methods and aims we have identified as right-
hand path and left-hand path for this study was originally developed in an eastern (Indo-
Iranian) context. What we are immediately struck with when we look to the oldest
foundations of European culture is the existence of the range of paths relatively free of the
dichotomizing tendencies which lead to the left-hand path/right-hand path labels.
32
Notes For Chapter 2
(1) See J. Mallory, In Search of the Indo-Europeans (London: Thames and Hudson, 1989)*
(2) For a critical study of Dumezil’s worts and ideas, see C. Scott Littleton, The New Comparative
Mythology. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973,)
(3) Francis M, Comford. trans. and ed. The Republic of Plato. (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1941), pp. 119-129.
(4) See Friedrich Nietzsche, The Birth of Tragedy (New York: Vintage, 1967 [1972]).
(5) For a convenient introduction to the Rig Veda , see Wendy Donniger O’Flaherty, The Rig Veda
(Hannondsworth, UK: Penguin, 1981.
(6) Julius Evola, The Yoga of Power: Tantra, Shakti, and the Secret Way. trans. Guido Stucco.
(Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions, 1992), p. 66.
(7) For a discussion of tan trie science, see Mookojee and Khana, The Tantric Way (Boston: New York
Graphic Society, 1977), pp. 93-125.
(8) J.N. Farquhar, An Outline of the Religious Literature of India (Debli: Modlal Banarsidass, 1920),
pp. 265ff.
(9) Evola, The Yoga of Power, p. 30.
(10) See Joscelyn Godwin Arktos: The Polar Myth (Grand Rapids, MI: Phanes, 1993), p. 33, and also
Tilak, Bal Gangadhar. The Arctic Home in the Vedas. Poona: The Kesari, 1903.
(11) Alain Daniel on. The Myths and Gods of India (Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions, 1985), p. 382.
(12) MiiceaEliade, Yoga: Immortality and Freedom (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969,2nd
ed.), p. 142.
(13) Sastri, S. Subrahmanya and T.R. Srinivasa Ayyangar, eds. Jivanmuktiviveka (Liberation in Life)
of Vidyaranya (Adyar Adyar Library and Research Centre, 1978.
(14) Louis Renou, ed., Hinduism New York: George Braziller, 1961), p. 40.
(15) Eliade, Yoga, p. 142.
(16) Eliade, Yoga, p. 128.
(17) Evola, Yoga of Power, p. 66.
(18) One of the most coherent discussions of the process of personal transformation within tantrUm is
found in chapter 6 of Arthur Avalon’s Shakti and Shakta. (New York: Dover, [1959]), pp. 136-187.
(19) N. N. Bhattacharyya, History of die Tantric Religion (New Dehli: Manohar, 1982), p. 341.
(20) Bhattacharyya, History, p. 341.
(21) B hattac haryya, History, p. 317.
(22) B hattac haryya, History, p. 318.
(23) Evola, Yoga of Power, pp. 54-55.
(24) Robert E. Svaboda, Aghora II: Kundalini (Albuquerque, NM: Brotherhood of Life, 1993), p. 85.
(25) Evola, Yoga of Power, p. 55.
(26) Evola, Yoga of Power, p. 55.
(27) Avalon, Arthur (= John Woodroffe), Shakti and Shakta. (New York: Dover, [1959]), p. 164 and
Evola, Yoga of Power, p. 55.
(28) Svaboda, Aghora II, pp. 67-68.
(29) DanielOu, Myths and Gods of India, p. 258.
(30) Bhattacharyya, History, p. 108.
(31) Eliade, Yoga, pp. 228-229.
(32) Evola, Yoga of Power, p. 68.
(33) Evola, Yoga of Power, p. 66.
(34) Margaret and James Stutley, Harper’s Dictionary of Hinduism (New York: Harper and Row,
1977), pp. 67; 321.
(35) Francis King, Tantra for Westerners (New York: Destiny, 1986), p. 95.
(36) Danielon, Myths and Gods of India, p. 383.
(37) Svaboda, Aghora II, p. 27.
(38) Svaboda, Aghora II, p. 192.
(39) Svaboda, Aghora II, p. 198.
33
(40) In tbe Vedantic school tbe only way to liberation is through jnana. Bondage is due to avidya (non-
knowing) and involvement with the phenomenal universe is due to avidya alone, (cf. S.K. Ramachandra
Rao Jivanmukti inAdvaita. Gandhinagar, Bangalore: Prakasbana, 1978, p. 31.
(41) Renon, Hinduism, p. 35.
(42) Mookojee and Khana, pp. 28-29.
(43) Danielou, Myths and Gods of India, p. 382.
(44) Evola, Yoga of Power, pp. 93-100.
(45) Anton Szandor LaVey, The Satanic Bibk. New York: Avon, 1969, p. 46ff.
(46) Danielou, Myths and Gods of India, pp. 382-83.
(47) Danielou, Myths and Gods of India, p. 212.
(48) Svaboda, Aghora II, p. 56.
(49) S vaboda, Aghora 11, p. 56.
(50) Svaboda, Aghora II, p. 21.
(51) S vaboda, Aghora II, p. 24.
(52) Bhattacharyya, History, p. 109.
(53) Bhattacharyya, History, p. 110.
(54) Svaboda, Aghora 11, p. 69.
(55) Danielou, Myths and Gods of India, p. 212.
(56) Benjamin Walker, Tantrism (Wellingborough, UK: Aquarian Press, 1982), P 49ff.
(57) Walker, Tantrism, pp. 64-66.
(58) Svaboda, Aghora 11, p. 89-91.
(59) Eliade, Yoga, p. 239.
(60) Walker, Tantrism, p. 52.
(61) Walker, Tantrism, p. 50ff; King, Tantra, p. 92.
(62) Benjamin Walker, Gnosticism: Its History and Influence. (Wellingborough, UK:
Aquarian Press, 1983), p. 117.
(63) King, Tantra, p. 92.
(64) Svaboda, Aghora II, p. 85; 205ff.
(65) Edward Conze, Buddhism (New York: Philosophical Library, 1961), pp. 191-192.
(66) W. Y. Evans-Wentz, ed., Tibetan Yoga and Secret Doctrines (London: Oxford University Press,
1958,2nd ed.), p. 138.
(67) King, Tantra, p. 92.
(68) Republic, pp. 227-235.
(69) Walker, Gnosticism, pp. 163-165.
(70) Mircea Eliade, History of Religious Ideas (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978), vol I,
pp. 302-305.
(71) Eliade, History of Religious Ideas (1982), vol. n, pp. 309ff.
(72) Geo Widengren. Die Religionen Irons (Stuttgart Kohlhammer, 1965), pp. 23-26
(73) Eliade History of Religious Ideas (1978), vol. I, pp. 309ff.
(74) Mary Boyce, Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices (London: Routiedge and Kegan
Paul, 1979), p. 54ff.
(75) Eliade, History of Religious Ideas (1982), vol. n, pp. 309ff.
(76) A basic studies of Mithraism is offered by Franz Cumont, The Mysteries of Mithras (New York:
Dover, 1956).
(77) Mircea Eliade, Patterns in Comparative Religion (New York: Meridian, 1963), pp. 290-291.
(78) Mircea Eliade, The Two and the One (New York: Harper and Row, 1965), pp. 50-55.
(79) Insightful studies of tbe Yezidis have recently been offered by John S. Guest The Yezidis: A
Study in Survival (London: KPI, 1987) and Peter Lambom Wilson, "Iblis, the Black Light” Gnosis 14
(Winter 1990), pp. 2-47.
34
Chapter 3
Roots of the Western Tradition
Roots of the Western Left-Hand Path
With varying degrees of accuracy in European culture the phrase left-hand path has come to
mean Satanism. This is both accurate and inaccurate. It is accurate insofar as the Judeo-Christian
religious system — which coined the name “Satan” (from Hebrew s tn, opponent; adversary) —
saw in its conception of evil many traits and characteristics of left-hand path philosophy and
religion. So when left-hand path practitioners looked at the orthodox Judeo-Christian systems,
they would might feel a high degree of sympathy with and for the Devil. This seems to have
happened with many Gnostic sects.
The equation of the western left-hand path with Satanism is inaccurate insofar as the practice of
the left-hand path predates the imposition of the Judeo-Christian ideology in Europe. There was
and is the practice of the left-hand philosophy in a purely pagan or heathen (i.e., pre-Christian)
religious context, which does not need to refer to Satan or Lucifer to be intelligible. The left-hand
path would have existed in Europe without the advent of Christianity (as it does and did in India).
But when Christianity did arrive, it labeled not only the indigenous left-hand path practices of the
heathens as diabolical, but the right-hand path ones as well. It was, however, only the left-hand
path practitioners who were insightful and perhaps courageous enough to identify in some degree
their ways with those of the adversary of the right-hand path Christians.
The Pagan Roots in Europe
The great Indo-European cultural and linguistic migrations beginning around 4000 bce
graphically shows the true root of “western” culture. The cultural roots of the peoples now
speaking Celtic, Italic, Germanic, Slavic, or Hellenic (Greek) languages is probably to be found
somewhere to the northeast of the Black Sea.(l) The national mythologies and religious systems of
philosophy of these groups are closely related due to their common ultimate origin. What these
migration routes also show, however, is the equally common origin shared between this western
branch of the family and an eastern branch which is the Indo-Iranian tradition discussed in Part L
Just as the left-hand path philosophy developed in the east, we could equally expect to find one
developed in the west In the west in fact the basics of the left-hand path philosophy seem to have
had virtual equal footing with right-hand path philosophies in the west— and seem to have
dominated in the northern parts of Europe.
An important thing to remember about the Indo-European cosmology is that it postulates a
divine order— which partakes of a higher or more permanent level of reality— that is reflected in
the human order. The human soul, the psyche , is a gift of the gods and the social orderings are
reflections of the orderings of the various pantheons of gods. This primal understanding was
developed into an articulated philosophy by Plato in the *west* —just as it had been by the school
of Indian sages responsible for the Brahmanas and Upanishads in die “east”
History is full of tragedies and apparent tragedies. At least on one level, one of these tragedies
was the slow erosion and ultimate destruction of the established forms of European religious
systems through the incursion of an “exotic eastern religion” we now call Christianity. The
35
ecclesiastical institutions, or churches, supposedly based on the teachings of an executed holy man
named Jesus, slowly and over a period of nearly 1300 years, disestablished the indigenous
religious and philosophical traditions of the European nations and replaced them with the
establishment of an international institution. This institution was characterized by an obsession for
dogmatic unanimity on matters of “spiritual” teachings.
A map of the ideological campaigns of the Church would show a spread of Christianity from
cities in the Mediterranean region northward and outward into the countryside. Of course, the
church was nowhere able to impose itself absolutely. To be successful it had to compromise at
every step along the way. But it was willing to do so in exchange for its ultimate prize— universal
establishment.
Everywhere the church advanced, one of its standard practices was to turn the native gods into
devils and to destroy the old temples and sacred groves and in their places build churches. We will
return to the Christianization process in chapter 4, but for right now it is important to realize that: 1)
the oldest roots of European and Indo-Iranian culture are identical (Indo-European), 2) the present
established religious culture in Europe has its roots on foreign soil (the Middle East), and 3) the
exotic Christian tree was only able to disestablish the native tree in a partial, external way.
So in very many ways what we call the “western tradition” is really largely southern and non-
Indo-European in origin, while what is commonly referred to as the “eastern tradition” really has
roots in common with actual European culture.
However, as the “western tradition” stands now, it is indeed a synthesis (albeit an awkward
and uncomfortable one) of actual European and southern traditions derived from the Nilo-
Mesopotamian (Egyptian and Mesopotamian) magical cultures. Therefore we must also examine
the possible presence of the left-hand path philosophy in those regions as one of the possible roots
of the modem left-hand path.
The Hellenic Left-Hand Path
In the history of the world perhaps no other single culture has been more influential over a
wider expanse of time and space than the Hellenic. Moving down from the north, Hellenic, or
Greek, tribes invaded and established themselves throughout the southern Balkan and Italic
peninsulas and throughout the islands of the eastern Mediterranean Sea from about 1600 to 1100
bce. The indigenous — non-Indo-European — culture which they overcame was an unusually
vibrant and powerful one— having its apparent epicenter on the island of Crete. The Greek culture
of the Homeric Age (850-750 bce) is largely a true synthesis of Hellenic (Indo-European) and
Minoan (Old European) cultures. Synthesis along with a sense of harmony and moderation are the
major Hellenic cultural traits.
Because the Hellenic culture was so much a sea-going and mercantile one, it made deep-level
contacts with the cultures of Egypt and other cultures of the eastern Mediterranean— for example,
that of the Phoenicians. But whatever the cultural elements the Greeks might have adopted or
borrowed from other cultures— such as writing (from the Phoenicians) or building in stone (from
the Minoans) — the one aspect which remained thoroughly Greek — and Indo-European — was
their idealism. Whether we see it in India or Ireland, in Rome or Greece, the Indo-European
cosmology — or understanding of the world-order — hinges on the theory that this world is a
material reflection of another, more real one — for example that of the gods and goddesses —
beyond whom looms a yet more real world of abstract principles. This is expressed in the intrinsic
linguistic dichotomy between physis (nature) and psyche (soul).
This idealism (ultimately codified by the philosopher Plato) coupled with the Greek language
and writing system (one so simple and convenient even sailors and merchants could master it)
allowed Hellenic culture to transform most cultures with which it had any long-standing contact
36
— Prometheus and Pandora —
The Origins of Evil and its Transformative
Effects on Humanity
The exact age of the myth of Prometheus (whose name means “the one with foreknowledge”)
is unknown. However, the idea of a transpersonal — or semi-divine — figure who is responsible
for providing humanit y with the spiritual faculty by which humans may know things seems to be a
common Indo-European one. Such a figure would normally be considered a benefactor of
humanity— in fact its true creator (in a spiritual sense). One 4th century source (Pausanias 10.4.4)
even says Prometheus fashioned men from clay (see Eliade HRI, I, p. 255). This would seem to
be a myth borrowed from the Middle East identifying Prometheus with Jehovah. Also, perhaps
under the influence of the Middle Eastern notions concerning the “evil” of knowledge, the Greeks
at one point turned this figure into a paradigm of the origin of human misery.
Hesiod's Theogony (ca 700 bce) is the oldest written reference to the myth of Prometheus.
Hesiod portrays Prometheus as a titanic (pre-Olympian) entity who engenders a division between
the gods and humanity— who had until that time lived in haimony together. Gods and men wished
to part on good terms, so Prometheus institutes the first sacrifice of an ox to seal their pact of
separation and independence. This rite is said to have occurred at a place called Mekone. After the
slaying of the ox, Prometheus divides it into two portions: one of bone and one of flesh and
entrails. The bones he covers with fat so that the smoke rising from them attracts the attention of
Zeus, supreme deity of the Olympians. The meat is disguised by the fat of the ox. A choice is
offered to the Olympian— and he chooses the fat-covered bones. When Zeus discovers the truth,
he becomes angry at Prometheus and mankind and withdraws the divine fire which had
presumably been one of those things previously shared by gods and humans.
This division of the sacrificial animal between edible parts, which are consumed by humans,
and generally inedible parts, which are presumed to be the gods' share, is common Indo-European
practice and the myth is on one level a later attempt to “explain” this practice.
Again according to Hesiod, Prometheus responded to this by stealing the divine fire from
Olympus. He carries it back to the world of men in a hollow fennel stalk. And once more Zeus is
moved to punish mankind and Prometheus. This time Prometheus is pinned to a great rock—
where an eagle comes daily to eat of his liver. To punish humanity Zeus sends them a woman—
Pandora (“All-Suffering”)— out of whose box all the woes of mankind spring.
Hesiod’s portrayal of Prometheus is avowedly negative— although the primitive, pre-
Hesiodic, roots of the myth may have not been so. After all, it is a myth of the self-determined and
independent actions of our species— a myth of its “coming of age.” Such transformative myths
always seem to involve rebellion against authority. Zeus himself had not merely disobeyed his
father (Kronos)— he killed him and created a new divine order throngh his rebellion. By taking a
negative attitude toward Prometheus' actions, Hesiod shows himself to be one who longed for the
“good old days” before humanity had individuated or differentiated itself from its divine ancestry.
Belief in a divine ancestry is also a common Indo-European tradition.
That the negative attitude toward Prometheus was not universal is shown by the later version of
the myth presented by the Attic tragedian Aeschylus (525-456 bce). Aeschylus shows Prometheus
as a tragic hero and savior of mankind.
Aeschylus apparently originally wrote three tragedies— a Promethean trilogy — but only the
first of these Prometheus Bound , survives. In this version of the myth Zeus simply refuses to give
humanity the divine fire— while at the same time he complains that humanity is wretched and
deficient Zeus plans to destroy humanity and create a new race. Prometheus protests man’s
destruction, and tells Zeus that what humanity needs to fulfill its potential is the divine fire. Zeus
refuses to relinquish it so Prometheus steals the fire from Olympus and is punished for it in the
same way as described by Hesiod. Where Hesiod had emphasized the fall of humanity from a
“Golden Age” in which it was undifferentiated from the family of the gods, Aeschylus stresses a
“myth of progress” in which the species begins to evolve faculties of consciousness after its
contact with the gift of the divine fire.
37
Although the text of Aeschylus’ final tragedy is lost, we know from accounts that in it Zeus
releases and forgives Prometheus. He does this basically because the prediction of “the One with
Foreknowledge” concerning the potential of humanity in possession of the gift of the divine flame
turned ont to be right— although the fact that Themis, the mother of Prometheus, has given him
the secret of the future fall of Zeus also plays a role.
Historically this reconciliation of Zeus and Prometheus may have been spurred by the fact that
in the time of Aeschylus — at the end of the Hellenic Age — there was an annual festival in Athens
dedicated to Prometheus. Although this began as a festival mainly patronized by craftsmen, by the
time of Aeschylus it was also popular with intellectuals. The cult of this “god of evil” had become a
widespread phenomenon.(2) It may well be that the story of the forgiveness of Zeus was created
more to promote Zeus as a god of forgiveness and wisdom than to rehabilitate the reputation of
Prometheus. Zeus is even said to have forgiven his father, Kronos, and made him king of
Elysium.
The Myth of Prometheus and the Left-Hand Path
In the history of the kind of thought we are calling left-hand path in the west, it is difficult to
overestimate the importance of the myth of Prometheus. In it we have perhaps the oldest western
representation of the myth of the Bringer of the Gift of Divine Light or Fire portrayed as a villain in
the history of humanity. The fact that he is eventually revaluated as a hero is also a significant
western phenomenon we will see repeatedly.
It is curious to note that the American pioneer of modem Satanism, Anton LaVey, much
admires the work of the sociologist Orrin Klapp and his book Heroes, Villains and Fools which
analyzes the ways in which modem figures are transformed from among those categories of public
perception.
In the Indo-European metalanguage of myth, the patterns of the right-hand path and left-hand
path ideologies — although they openly vie with one another and compete for validation — are
somehow reconciled and learn to co-exist. This is in marked contrast with the fanatical approaches
of right-hand path systems of middle eastern — or southern — origin in which their “Satans” are
never forgiven or reevaluated.
The myth of Prometheus is one which shows the spiritual or intellectual tutelage of a figure
who provides humanity with its divine aspect — its intellect—and who is as such the true father
of its spirit Prometheus promotes the individuation of mankind from the gods and sets it as a
species on its heroic quest to develop its own sense of divine power. As long as humanity was
closely linked to the gods, it could not evolve in accordance with its own mysterious quest
Prometheus forced humanity out of its Olympian nest— and made it so that the species would have
to fly or destroy itself. However, he also saw to it that the species was provided with the one thing
that was absolutely necessary to flight— the divine fire of the gods. The myth clearly places the
unbound exercise of the intellect — the divine faculty of consciousness — in die cultural
mainstream of at least an aristocracy of intellectual merit.
Promethean mythology has been tremendously influential over the course of European cultural
history. Since Aeschylus, the figure of the light-bearer was seen at least to some extent as a tragic
hero. The myth itself probably did much to shape the lives of martyred philosophers such as
Socrates and perhaps Jesus of “Nazareth” — or at least the literary representations of them.
Beyond this it is interesting to note that Mary Shelly subtitled her Romantic manifesto novel,
Frankenstein , “the modem Prometheus”— which implies a complex metaphor (and even the
genesis of a neo-mythology) worthy of study in its own right
The Greek Mysteries
and the Left-Hand Path
The whole subject of the various mystery systems — their origius, interrelationships, and
especially the exact nature of what they taught and how they taught it — remains, well,
mysterious.(3) The initiatory function of the concept “mystery” (Gk. mysterion) is powerful and
pervasive in many systems of religion, magic, and initiation— but its full significance is yet to be
38
discovered.(4) Also exactly what aspects of the Mysteries can be designated as right-hand path or
left-hand path remain obscure, but I hope to be able to shed some light on this question here.
As Nietzsche was to emphasize centuries later, there are essentially two philosophical
approaches are present in Hellenic (and by inference Indo-European) culture: the Dionysian and
Apollonian. Of course, there tends to be the human, all-too-human urge to equate one with good
and the other with evil, but this is always counterproductive. In fact, either philosophical approach
to enlightenment can be used for right-hand or left-hand path spiritual aims— and a synthesis of
both is perhaps the ideal.
The Dionysian approach is that of the orgia (orgy) by which human consciousness is united
with that of the divine by means of a lowering of peripheral consciousness to a level where the
divine — or “the other” — subsumes it. Dionysian spiritual technology makes use of rhythms
(drumming, dancing, etc.) drugs (e.g. wine), and perhaps sex to lower the normal threshold of
consciousness by overloading the physical senses which allows a union with the divine to occur.
The Apollonian approach is that of katharsis (purification) by which the consciousness cleanses
and distances itself (through intellectual discipline and physical austerities) of impurities to such
extent that consciousness is eventually raised to the level of divinity. Apollonian spiritual
technology makes use of reason and physical austerities (such as dietary restrictions,
vegetarianism, etc.) to raise the threshold of consciousness by suppressing the physical senses
which allows the psyche to gain union with the divine.
Grphism or the Orphic Mysteries (so-called after the myth of Orpheus) make use of both
technologies— though the Apollonian seems to predominate. Both the Orphic and Pythagorean
mystery schools — which may share a common origin — practice vegetarianism. Whatever the
historical origins of this practice, it is mythically traced back to that first animal sacrifice held by
Prometheus at Mekone. Social participation was virtually mandatory in such sacrifices. In
European practice such sacrifices was a matter of ritually slaughtering an animal and sharing the
parts of the animal with the gods— the hard or inedible parts going to the god(s) and the edible
portions being consumed by the faithful as an act of communion with the god(s). Animals were
ceremonially slaughtered with a minimum of pain and fear to the animal as it was thought to
embody a divine essence. The Qrphics and Pythagoreans saw the institution of the eating of flesh
as a sign of the presence of the ‘Titanic” (i.e. base or sub-divine) -element in humanity and
carnivorous practice as a perpetuation of that Titanic element Their rejection of meat-eating also
had the socio-religious effect of separating them from the mainstream of Hellenic society. They
rejected the established practices of religion and society of their day.(5)
The over all process of initiation in these mysteries— which presupposed that humans were
now a mixture of a Titanic nature and a divine nature — involved purifications ( katfiarmoi ),
followed by initiation rites 0 teletai ), and the constant leading of an “Orphic life.” Through these
methods one could p.liminate the Titanic element and become bakkhos — “separated out” and in a
“divine, Dionysiac condition.”(6)
This theme of “separation” from the conventional social and natural order of the cosmos is one
common to the left-hand path. Eliade concludes that the Orphic is “able to free himself from the
‘demonic’ element manifest in all profane existence (ignorance, flesh, diet, etc.)” and that the final
goal is “the separation of the ‘Orphic’ from his fellow men and in the last analysis, the final
separation of the soul from the cosmos ”(7) This same theme will also be emphasized in the Setian
philosophy of Michael Aquino in the Temple of Set
In the Orphic or Mystery traditions of the Greeks there are also some original contributions to
ihe mythology of the right-hand versus the left-hand paths. In his Republic Plato, apparently
drawing on mystery traditions, says that the dead follow two paths to judgment: the just “to the
right upwards through the sky ... the unjust were condemned to the downward road to the
left...”(8) This is no literary or heuristic invention by the philosopher, as shown by archaeological
evidence of tomb complexes in southern Italy and Crete which have plaques with inscriptions
indicating that those who go on the “right hand road” go “toward the sacred fields and grove of
Persephone.”(9)
39
In this Orphic eschatology it seems that the good and just go the right hand road and are not
reincarnated. They drink of the spring waters of Mnemosyne (Memory) and “reign with die other
heroes.” But the wicked must d rink from the spring called Lethe (Forgetfulness) and so loose all
memory of the otherworld and are reincarnated in this world as “punishment.” 10)
In other words, the point of Orphic initiation was for the initiate to become a god— or god¬
like. In the underworld the Orphic initiate is told: “O fortunate, o happy one! Thou has become a
god, having been a man.”(ll)
The attitudes toward what a desirable postmortem existence would be seem to have smitea over
time. In the early historical phase it seems that the virtuous and good were rewarded with rebirth
after rebirth in the world— which was seen as a highly desirable place to be. This amounted to an
earthly immortality in ever rejuvenated bodies. Eventually these virtuous humans would be called
by duty to the level of the immortal gods. However, the wicked in this early stage of such beliefs
were “punished” with a permanent death, or non-existence. Later, there seems to have been a shift
in some cultures’ (for example those of Greece and India) attitudes toward life in this world. In this
phase it is believed that the wicked are punished with cycles of rebirth in this world and the
virtuous are rewarded with a permanent existence among the gods and heroes.
Pythagoras and the Left-Hand Path
The doctrines of the Greek philosopher Pythagoras (about 582-507 bce) are said to be drawn
from a wide variety of sources— Egypt, Chaldea (Babylon), as well as Hyperborea (the extreme
north).(12) However, virtually all of the major doctrines ascribed to Pythagoras can be derived
from native Hellenic or Indo-European analogs. Although Pythagoras may have indeed travelled
and learned in the far flung centers of esoteric knowledge— it seems most likely that he
synthesized what he learned according to a uniquely Hellenic methodology. Most of the basic
Pythagorean assumptions about the origin and destiny of the human soul are accepted from the
Orphic mysteries. Pythagoras and his followers transformed the methodology of the process of
initiation from an external or experiential one to an internal or philosophical one. Plato would
further refine this Hellenic philosophical tradition.
Pythagoras made philosophy into a “whole science”— or a holistic understanding of existence.
He postulated that number is the “root” or principle (Gk. arche ) of all things. But in his philosophy
numbers were more qualities than quantities,(13) and therefore his apparently quantitative science
was understood as a qualitative one. Mathematics revealed a hidden reality lying beyond the veil of
appearances. To Pythagoras understanding the relationships and harmonies among numbers is
tantamount to understanding the harmonies among things themselves.
The left-hand path characteristics of Pythagoreanism are more implicit than explicit Pythagoras
was primarily interested in discovering the bases of universal harmonies — of the ways all things
fit together so beautifully — the “music of the spheres.”
Plato and the Left-Hand Path
Although even Plato himself would never have claimed to have invented his system of
philosophy, as he understood all true knowledge to be a matter of “recollection” (Gk. anamnesis)
of the soul’s inherent contents, he can be called the single greatest codifier and synthesizer erf
idealistic philosophy. Plato drew openly from a wide variety of philosophical sources especially
the Hellenic mysteries and Pythagoreanism — but he brought to those sources a clarity of objective
purpose hitherto unseen.
The idealism of Plato should not be seen as the beginning of philosophy. It is a product oi a
millennia-long process of traditional speculation and intellectual inquiry begun at the dawn of Indo-
European culture. Among all the languages of the world ouly the Indo-European and its derivatives
has a true verb meaning “to be” in the sense of “to exist ” There were originally two verbs one
meaning to be (in the sense of equivalence) — the chair is red — and one meaning “to be” (in the
sense of existence): “To be or not to be, that is the question.” In the ancient tongue these two verb®
were *bheu - (to be equivalent) and *se- (to exist). This came down to us in Old English in the
distinction between beon and we son respectively. With the demise of the innate Indo-Europea®
40
system of thought— precipitated by the influx of middle eastern thought forms promoted by the
church — the two verbs collapsed together* This is the reason why the verb “to be” in modem
English is so highly irregular— it is derived from a mixture of two different stems.
What does all this have to do with Plato or the left-hand path? This is not hard to realize:
Plato’s philosophy is an attempt to define *se- and develop a system of training so that others may
know what exists — what is real — about themselves and the cosmos.
Although all of Plato’s works are essentially focused on the development of the soul, many
have practical applications as well. As viewed from the modem perspective, the chief practical
benefit of Plato’s philosophy would be political not religious — as the Philosopher-Kings
produced by the system would characteristically first exercise their knowledge in practical socio¬
political ways. In this aspect of his philosophy Plato harkens back to some very basic Indo-
European assumptions— and structures. As in the ancient roots of his culture, the terrestrial socio¬
political arrangements were seen as reflections of such structures existing in the world of the
gods— as laid out in the Republic , Plato wished to (re-)institute a political structure based on Indo-
European principles:
Function
Platonic Terminology
Ruler/Priests
Warriors
Craftsmen/Farmers
Guardians (Philosopher-Kings)
Auxiliaries
Artisans/Tradesmen
But in Plato’s case it was not a wish merely to return to archaic models for their own sakes—
but rather to realize and newly understand on a philosophical basis the principles and Forms on
which these structures stood:
We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.(14)
The Academy, Plato’s school near Athens, was to be a place where elite students could be
trained as far as possible to hold right beliefs, think rationally, and ultimately to be able to intuit
rationally and thus Understand the very Forms (Gk. eide) or principles which are the ultimate
source of all things or phenomena in this world. To do this Plato devised a system of education
based on a specific understanding of the soul (psychology) and theory of ho* that soul(or souls)
can know its objects of knowledge. In many ways Plato’s system is a philosophical refinement
(and in some cases a simplification) of the traditional psychologies of the Indo-European
peoples.(15) Figure 3-1 shows the Platonic scale of knowledge. In this scheme the student, or
initiate, can be moved out of the realm of totally subjective conjectures — the objects of which are
not real things but only shadows — into the realm of right beliefs based on established traditions
and “common sense.” This is the highest level of knowledge possible for the mass of humanity—
and it is itself a great achievement Beyond this, however, is a rational form of thought (. dkmoia ) or
logical thought based on mathematics. It is here that the influence of the Pythagorean school on the
Platonic synthesis is most profound. Both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of number could
be approached here. But fids dianetic is not the apex of knowledge. Perhaps the establishment
“academics” (an unfortunate etymological development!) consider the quantification of knowledge
most desirable— to “know” something becomes tantamount to “get the numbers on it” This is an
aspect of dianoia but it is only a means to a greater end. This greater end has been virtually
forgotten today in our “academies.” Logical training is really a preparation for noesis in which the
initiate will be able to Understand the real principles which exist in the realm of Forms. At this
point the initiate is the equivalent of a Guardian or Philosopher-King (or Queen!)
41
The Platonic Scale of Knowledge
AGATHON
(The Good)
8 / Objects
§ 1
oo 1 _
g 1 Forms
B 1 (ideas)
<3 <
States of Mind
Intelligence (noesis)
Knowledge ( episteme )
A
•5 1 Mathematical
■g / Objects
£ (
Thought ( dianoia )
r
8
§ Visible Things
&
Cl
<
Belief (pistis)
B
® 1 Images
i (
Conjecture ( eikasia )
A
The system of Plato, as codified by the Neoplatonists (including Kabbalists, Sufis, etc.),
underlies most current western systems of initiation and occult training, but because the source has
often been intentionally obscured, the essential roots are sometimes difficult to discover. One might
still inquire into the nature of the connection between Platonism and the left-hand path as we
understand it philosophically. The ultimate root of this teaching lies in the mysteries. The simple
answer is that Plato tanght a rationally based system for the attainment of a state of living “god-
hood”— the Philosopher-King. This is the virtual equivalent of the jivanmukti state of attainment
in the system of Indian philosophy.
Plato has arrived at a rational and noetic method of attainment of god-hood formerly attained in
the mysteries by means of initiatory experiences and dramatic ordeals as well as purifications and
physical austerities. The idealistic philosophy and noetic methods of Platonism would, in the
history of western systems of initiation, be used as the underlying structure augmented and
complemented by every sort of initiatory, philosophical, and magical technology in the ancient
world. This synthesis would emerge in Neoplatonism (from the 2nd century ce onward) from
which it would spread into many varied speculative initiatory schools, e.g. Kabbalism,(16)
Sufism,(17) as well as Christian mysticism.(18)
Most, if not all, of these schools developed Platonic idealism in the direction of right-hand path
mysticism, they aim not for the elevation of the individual intellect to the equivalence of divinity, or
the Good ( agathon ), but rather for the reabsorption or total regimentation of the individual in the
substance of the One.
The pure Platonic aims have perhaps been revived — and placed in the context of a magical
technology — most eloquently by Michael Aquino of the Temple of Set, who openly avows his
initiatory debt to pure Platonism.
42
The Epicurean and Stoic Schools
Two philosophical streams of thought which have their sources in ancient (4th century bce)
Greece, but which are expressions of universal categories and ones that continue to influence life
today are Stoicism and Epicureanism*
Epicureus (341-270 bce) founded a school of thought largely based on the atomic physics of
Democritos of a century earlier. Greek atomism declared that everything — including that which is
called soul or spirit — is made up of atoms — particles so small they can be divided no further. The
Epicurean holds that upon death the human soul, as well as the body, simply dissipates back into
undifferentiated nature. Everything is material. However, the more rarified substance of the soul or
intellect can help lead a person to the most perfect and happy state of being known as ataraxia —
“unperturbableness” or “serenity.” As the senses are the only access points through which pleasure
or pain enter the mind or soul, to attain the state of ataraxia an Epicurean must control the quality of
sensual experience. He or she avoids pain and maximizes pleasure. The outer life must be
harmonized with the ideal quality of experience^ 19)
The Stoic aims for ataraxia also, but does so in a very different way.
Stoicism is named for a school of philosophers who used to meet in the 4th century bce at the
stoa (portico) of the market at Athens. The Stoic claims a separate, non-naiural existence for the
soul. The soul or psyche may then control the quality and/or quantity of sensual stimulus and thus
attain ataraxia not by controlling the outer stimuli but rather how the mind responds to such stimuli.
The Stoic conditions Ms or her inner life to harmonize with an ideal state of being. Outer events
become — or can be made to become — inconsequential. The Stoics hold that the soul existed
before the body and that it will continue to exist after the body dies in a future state of ‘"rewards and
punishments.” In this and other regards Stoicism was very much in harmony with other schools of
the mystery traditions as well as Platonic philosophies. The Stoic typically needs a transpersonal
ideal or principle to which loyalty and duty can be devoted in order for the philosophy to work.
Both of these philosophies were popular in Hellenistic Greece as well as Republican and
Imperial Rome. Stoicism virtually became the “official philosophy” of Rome in the days of the
Empire. The republican Cicero (106-43 bce) and the Emperor Marcus Aurelius (121-180 ce) are
two of its most well-known exponents.(20)
From our perspective, both of these ancient schools supply critical ideas for understanding the
philosophy of the left-hand path. The Epicureans provide a materialistic, carnal cosmology
essential to the ideology of the Lesser Branch of the Left-hand Path. While Soticism develops
further Platonic and Neo-Platonic idealism— even providing for the divinizing of the dead.
The Left-Hand Path in the North
The Germanic Left-Hand Path
While important roots of the left-hand path in the west were being developed in the
Mediterranean region on a philosophical and anti-establishment basis, in the northern climes the
roots of the left-hand path were found in the established cultural soil. Whereas the Indo-European
god of law and order — Zeus-Jupiter — ruled in the south, in the north the god of magic and
death— Odin/Woden held sway. This same original Indo-European divinity is called Lugh among
tte Irish and Lieu [pron. hligh] among the Welsh. Lugh/Lleu literally means “light”— and the
common Welsh name Llewellyn means “light-bringer” (cf. Roman “Lucifer”)!
The figure of Odin and his myths which hold our attention when we seek to find the dark side
of the northern world. The name Odin means “the master of inspiration.”(21) The Old Norse form
is 6dinn. Odr means “poetic inspiration,” and is derived from Proto-Germanic wdd~, “rage;
inspiration.” This name is identical to Old English Woden. (It is a regular Old Norse rule to drop
the initial /w-/ before certain vowels.) This is a decidedly “psychic” god in the sense that his name
and function refer to essentially stfw/-related or psychological powers and faculties. He is often
depicted as a dark god of intrigue and mysterious motivations.
Odin’s essential importance in the shaping of the world and humanity is clear in Norse
mythology. He, with his two brothers (actually hypostases of himself) Vili (Will) and Ve (Sacred
One), perform the first sacrifice by killin g their ancestral father, the giant Ymir. From the parts of
43
his body they shape the material cosmos. To gain universal wisdom, Odin gives (sacrifices)
“himself to himself’ that he might take up the runes— symbols of articulated universal
knowledge. (22) These runes he shares with certain humans. Odin further pledges one of his eyes
— which is sunk into Munir’s Well (the Well of Memory) that he may gain the special sight that
drinking from the well gives.(23) He (along with his two other aspects) endows hum ank i n d with
threefold spiritual qualities shared with the gods.(24) In the sharing of divine consciousness and
the runes of wisdom Odin is very much like the figure of Prometheus in Hellenic mythology. The
major difference is that in this act he is not transgressing against authoritarian rule of law.
Odin, in the guise of Rig (Ruler) also engenders the three classes of human beings— fanners,
warriors, and rulers — on three different human women.(25) Thus he is responsible for not only
the psychological structure of humanity but for its social structure as well— both of which are
reflections of the divine order. For these reasons he is called the Alfadhir (All-Father). Odin, in the
guise of Bolverkr (Worker of Evil), obtains for the gods and humans the poetic mead of inspiration
through an act of oath-breaking deceit
Even in ancient, pre-Christian times, Odin had a somewhat “sinister” or dangerous reputation.
This is due to a whole complex of issues— but the most essential principle causing this reputation
appears to be that he is immersed in things — universal order, mysteries, inspiration, death — that
humans rarely understand and hence often fear and dread. Nevertheless Odin is acknowledged as
the highest of the gods throughout the Germanic world— from Anglo-Saxon England to Germany
and from Iceland to Sweden. Also adding to Ms sinister reputation is the fact that he committed the
two greatest ethical crimes in pursuing Ms quest for power and knowledge. To create the world
order, he killed a kinsman (a crime Odin shares with the Greco-Roman Zeus-Jupiter) and to rewin
the poetic mead he breaks an oath. Those and other acts render Odin unreliable to the mass of
humanity.
In the ancient Germanic tradition Odin is both the lord of light and the prince of darkness. He is
the god of the elite nobles, and thus the god of royalty and rulersMp. He is the father of magic and
the power to create and destroy. He is the god of poetry— of the art of effective linguistic
formulations and codifications of knowledge . Both Ms magical power and “Gnostic” formulas are
embodied in the runes (“mysteries”). Finally he is the lord of the dead, and rules over the
phenomenon of death— and thus shows his mastery over all transformational processes. It might
also be noted that the Celtic Lngh/Lleu shares almost all of these essential characteristics with Ms
Germanic counterpart(26)
The story of the conversion of the Germanic tribes to Christianity is pertinent to understanding
subsequent left-hand path developments there and among the descendants of those tribes.
The earliest converts to Christianity among the Germanic peoples were some Gothic tribes who
were part of the Arian school of theology. Ananism is named after a 4th century priest, Arius of
Alexandria, who held that the Son was created by the Father and hence was not co-etemal with the
Father. It is most likely, however, that the Goths developed their own form of uniquely Germanic
Christianity— for all Germanic tribes that converted to the new faith did so with this “GotMc
Church.” The Goths kept their religion and their people separate from the Roman Church and the
citizens of Rome. This type of national self-determination is, however, an anathema to the
universalistic and imperialistic Roman (Catholic) mind. The GotMc form of Christianity is marked
by a willinguess to make biblical texts available in the common language (the Gothic bishop Ulfilas
translated the Bible around 350 ce), involvement of the people in the liturgy (the Roman Christians
disdained the GotMc practice of rewriting traditional folk songs with religious lyrics), and a general
belief that humans are bom free of original sin, that they win salvation by their own virtuous
efforts, and that Jesus was a man who had attained to a god-like status showing the way for others
to follow. When these doctrines are compared to the orthodox Roman system outlined on page 00
below, the differences are obvious. In a free world — as the Germanic peoples had been used to
— these cultural/religious differences would have been a normal and expected state of affairs, but
the divine plan adhered to by the Roman Catholic (= universal) Church called for “one God, one
Church, one Pope!”
44
The historical break came for universalism when the Frankish (“French”) king Chlodwig or
Clovis (Ludwig/Louis) converted to Roman Christianity in 496 ce. He did so in order to get
foreign military aid from Rome in his attempt to conquer southern France, then dominated by the
Arian Visigoths. From that time onward the Frankish king was the chief military agent for the
Pope. Eventually the Goths were eradicated and apparently their faith with them— although some
“secret assemblies still claim to carry on their traditions.
The story of the conversion of Germany is generally a bloody one. Most of the conversions
were carried out upon threat of death after military conqnest by Frankish kings working as agents
for the Roman Pope.
Around 597 ce an early Roman mission was sent to England which at the time was made up of
a confederation of seven independent kingdoms. The king of Kent, ^Ethelbert, under the influence
of his wife, converted to Roman Christianity and began a long program of military and ideological
warfare was begun (oftentimes halfheartedly) on the other kingdoms. Finally by the middle of the
8th century England could be said to be at least nominally Christian.
In Scandinavia we find a variety of scenarios for the conversion to Christiamty. Denmark was
converted in an effort by monarchal forces to consolidate their total control of the land. Norway,
which had been a loose confederation of free landholders, was the object of attempts to conquer the
country by men snch as Olafr Tryggvason who then imposed monarchal control over the whole
land. It was during these attempts that freemen left the region and settled on the previously
uninhabited island called Iceland. Iceland peacefully converted to Christianity in the year 1000 by a
vote of its parliament. The last region to be conquered by Christian kings was Uppland, in
Sweden, where the last great heathen temple of Uppsala was burned in the year 1100.
The pre-Christian traditions, of course, continued long after official conversions had taken
place. For hundreds of years there existed in Europe the same type of religious creolism or
syncretism one now finds in the Caribbean basin. For the history of left-hand path ideas the all-
important figure of Odin underwent a radical — yet predictable — splitting of image. He was —
like all the other gods — portrayed as the epitome of evil. In parts of Germany the speaking of his
name was forbidden. It is for this reason that the modem German name for the day of the week
usually called after him was renamed Mittwoch, “Mid-Week,” while Thor (German Donnar) keeps
his weekday name, Donnerstag . The original name survives in some German dialects as
Wodenestag or Godensdach.(21 ) However, he also retained his patronage over the ruling elite—
even after Christian conversion. All the Anglo-Saxon kings continued to claim descent from
Woden,(28) and in the English language he retains his weekday name, Wednesday (Woden’s-
day).
In the spiritual technology or magic of the ancient Germanic peoples the Odinic magician
would, by using runic formulas, actually transform himself into a god-like being analogous to the
general characteristics of the god Odin. In this transformed state he would then work his will
directly upon the fabric of the world— again usually by using the sacred runes first won by his
patron god, Odin. In the most ancient period these called themselves Erulians— which means
“those who are ‘risen up’ into a god-like state.”(29)
The model of behavior provided by Odin — a brooding and relentless seeker of knowledge and
power — can be seen as an archetypal foreshadowing of the early modem myth of Dr. Johann
Faustus who broke all barriers in his search for these qualities.
What is essential to realize about the left-hand path aspects of ancient Odinism is that it
provided a traditional, established method of self-transformation along a divine model without an
intended melding with that god. Ancient Odinism, derived from the same ultimate religious stream
of thought that we find in eastern Indo-European forms of the left-hand path, was a path of making
the self godlike according to the mythic and heroic patterns exalted in the Germanic national
traditions. It is into this general religious matrix that Christian ideas were inserted— and so left-
hand path ideas rising up in the cultural context should not be unexpected. Note also that the form
of Christianity first accepted by the Goths was one not lacking in left-hand path qualities!
45
The Slavic Left-Hand Path
The Slavic mind has always been one mare “at home” with the Devil than perhaps any other
European culture. This perhaps stems from the fact that the Slavs conservatively maintained up
into recent years a cult of household spirits whose nature was quite ambiguous in terms of “good”
and “eviL”
John Bennett in his introduction to Ouspensky’s Talks with a Devil remarks:
The devils are not hostile to man except in so far as man is a friend of God. It is they
who have been responsible for every kind of technical progress: from them mankind
learned the arts of iron working, brewing and distilling; the Devil himself discovered
fire, built the first mill, and constructed the first wagon. The art of reading and
writing was one of his gifts to mankind. All these were bestowed to make man
independent of God and so break the link whereby man was able to help God in
governing the world.(30)
Two kinds of devils can be identified in Slavic lore: one is called Lukhavi, which means “crafty
one,” and the other is Chort, which simply means “the black one.”(31) The “crafty” devil seems
the more archaic and most truly Slavic. The appellation as Chart seems clearly to be an influence
from the dualistic cults which became extremely popular in Slavic regions in the Middle Ages and
after.
In Russian lore the Devil is often seen as a personification of the material world— a point of
view informed by both the ancient Slavic idea of the Lukhavi (providing skills and knowledge on
how to manage die material universe) and by the idea of Chort (embodying the material world in
opposition to the spiritual world).
This later dualistic aspect is clarified by M. P. Dragomanov who shows how Satanail, a
medieval Slavic form of the name of Satan, plays central role in the creation of the world and man.
God tells Satanail to dive into the primeval sea to retrieve earth and flint. Satanail gives God the
material, God keeps some in his right hand and creates dry land on the sea— out of his left hand he
gives flint to Satanail— who creates his angels: “hewed a numberless raging rout of carnal
gods.”(32) Some traditions hold that Satanail created the visible world, god the invisible, while
others hold that S atanail creates man’s body and God gives the soul. These ideas are clearly either
influenced by Bogomil teachings, or are related to them in some way.
Indeed, a Bulgarian tradition holds that the devil — called Zerzevul — created a counter
paradise to oppose that created by God. In triumph, Zerzevul says to his band of devils:
Ho, my band, have you seen that we too can make a paradise like what God can
make? Come, go in, eat, drink, of everything that is inside; I don’t forbid you
anything the way the Lord forbade something to the men he put inside to live with his
wife; I give you freedom to do whatever you want to do. Say this to the people:
whatever any one wants to do let him command. In my paradise there is food, drink,
pleasure-seeking, as much as they ask of me.(33)
It might be noted that among 20th century writers in the Russian cultural field, Ouspensky saw
the Devil as an obsession with the material world, while Gurdjieff saw him as an extraterrestrial
being.
*The Slavic devil is an important, if usually obscure, prototype for the archetype of the
materialistic libertinism of late 19th and 20th century Satanism, as expressed, for example by
Anton LaVey.
Although there are significant differences between the root of pre-Christian western Indo-
European ideology in Europe and the root of that same tree among the eastern Indo-Europeans,
there are profound similarities as well. In addition, through the nomadic northern Iranian tribes,
such as the Scythians and Sannatians, eastern ideas probably influenced the Hellenic, Slavic and
Germanic worlds. This contact was maintained from as early as 700 bce to as late as the 6th
46
century ce. Lndo-Iranian influence also streamed into the west— into the European as well as
Middle Eastern regions for several centuries of the Hellenistic period— from about 300 bce to 200
r*F
The similarities between the original western and eastern roots of the Indo-European worlds
make it clear that had the western root continued its evolution along its own lines of development,
there would indeed be an establishment oriented left-hand path tradition in the west today. Or if it
were not a part of the establishment itself, it would certainly be tolerated — and perhaps even
encouraged — by the mainstream culture.
However, the historical development of the western world portrays a split heritage. The
ideologies of the Middle East— or the true southern tradition — invaded the north in the form of
Christianity and eventually forged an uncomfortable symbiosis with the original European culture.
Virtually all of the manifestations of “heretical,” “deviant,” or “diabolical” religious behavior in
Europe from the time of the arrival of Christianity to the present day can be traced to native
impulses present in the manifold pre-Christian culture of Europe.
It almost goes without saying that in order to understand fully the left-hand path as it developed
in the west, one must grasp the essence of the Middle Eastern or southern tradition both in its
right-hand path and left-hand path manifestations. It is in these cultures that the popular modem
attitudes and imageries of the left-hand path — often embodied in the word Satanism
developed and were spread.
Left-Hand Path among the Semites
For a complete understanding of the history of what would be thought of as “Satanism” in
western Europe, no culture of antiquity is more important, with the possible exception of the
Iianian/Zoroastrian, than that of the Semites in general and the Hebrews in specific. A complete
survey of this field is not possible here,(34) besides which an investigation will only show that
from the philosophical perspective the Hebrew tradition has very little to offer of an original
character. Its chief importance is historical. The Hebrews forged a synthesis of several theological
and mythic streams— from Mesopotamia, Egypt, Canaan and Iran along with their own
p rimi tive Semitic religion.(35) But as the Hebraic religion, as we have records of it, is relatively
monolithic, it gives us little evidence of the development or existence of anything autochthonous
which is akin to the left-hand path. However, the synthetic Hebraic and later Judaic (after 586 bce)
religion provided a definite morphology and terminology for a whole “symbology of evil” to the
later Christian and Islamic worlds, and also to the Gnostics who made wide use of Judaic
mythology to illustrate their (often left-hand path) ideas.
It will be seen that the Semitic view of the world, although not originally strictly dualistic,
contained a hyperintensive feeling for the notions of sin and redemption, and of defilement and
purification. This for a kind of de facto dnalism that proved to be even more durable than that
of Zoroaster— although the Semitic religion was certainly influenced by the mythology and
theology of Iranian Mazdaism at a secondary level. .
Currently to be able to understand fully the Semitic mind-set, we must start historically with a
non-Semitic people: the Sumerians. These already heterogeneous people had their origins either m
the north or east of Mesopotamia (present-day Iraq)(36) and by 4500 bce had established
themselves in the region around the mouths of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Their magnificent
civilization would last in its authentic Sumerian form until around 1750 bce— but it wonld
continue in Semiticized form until after the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus II of Persia in 539 bce.
The springtime of Sumerian civilization was between 3200 and 2360 bce. It would be
oversimplifying to try to lump the Sumerians together with their successor Semitic systems. (J.B.
Russell makes this error in his volume The Devil, p. 84ff.)
The Sumerians were apparently constantly fearful of sudden and catastrophic upheavals oi
natural and socioeconomic origin. This has been contrasted with the Egyptian idea of ordered
processes within secure surroundings, and has been traced to the contrast in their agricultural
cycles in their two river systems: the Nile dependent on the regular rising of the waters to flood the
river valley, and the Mesopotamian region, dependent on rain and storm to bring waters to the
47
valleys of the Tigres and Euphrates. Be all that as it may, the original Sumerians seemed to have no
real concept of immanent divinity throughout the cosmos with everything ruled by the divine force
of me (divine order).
“Evil,” as such, was understood as a disruption of me in the forms of death and disease. The
introduction of death is not the responsibility of an evil figure, but rather of the Earth-God himself,
En-ki, who, instead of “determining the destiny” of certain herbs, eats them. In doing this En-ki
committed a “cosmic crime” in that he “did not behave in accordance with the principle that he
incarnated.” Eliade, 1978, pp. 58-59)
In the Sumerian religion the gods were forms or principles which worked together in me.
Man’s role was to “serve the gods,” i.e. to serve me. It is, however, also recognized that it is the
gods themselves — not man — who introduce the original disruptions in me. Thus when
Gilgamesh, who is perhaps the oldest epic hero in the history of literature, struggles against death
to attempt to gain immortality, he is not seen by the Sumerians as one who strives against the gods
and who is thus “evil,” but rather as one who is attempting to restore the original order of things
(me). Gilgamesh is seen essentially as a divine hero, not as an evil transgressor. When looking at
die originally Sumerian material in Mesopotamian religion one is struck by an ambivalence
reminiscent of the Hindu tradition.(37)
The Sumerian culture underwent a curious metamorphosis. From as early as 2800 bce Semitic
peoples (later identified with the Akkadians) began to infiltrate Sumer from the north and west and
began to “Semiticize” the culture, the language, and the religion from the lower echelons of the
society. (38) From 2350 to 2150 bce Akkadian kings ruled in Mesopotamia, a rulership destroyed
by invasions of the Gutians from Iran who dominated Akkadia until the Sumerians underwent a
renaissance and restored themselves to power in 2050. But by 1950 another Semitic group, the
Assyrians, gained control. Semitic culture and language would dominate Mesopotamia until the
Persian conquest in 539 bce.
To a great extent the Mesopotamian Semites — the Akkadians, Assyrians and Babylonians —
were Sumerianized in their religious and cultural forms. They adopted Sumerian writing
(cuneiform), and outer cultic forms and mythology. The old Sumerian myths were virtually
Semiticized. But the Semites were an essentially different people who brought their own
connotations to these Sumerian forms.
The optimistic Sumerian anthropogenesis — in which man is created by the gods — is
reinterpreted so that humanity is created from the blood of an evil entity: Kingn. Thus in the
Semitic version man is “condemned by his own origin.”(39) Here we have a basic idea very close
to “original sin.” This rather pessimistic anthropogenesis then virtually necessitates a new cult form
of personal prayers and penitential psalms. Here we hear the penitent praying for the forgiveness
of sins and the removal of transgressions.(40) It would also be a mistake to see the Mesopotamian
Semites as mere forerunners to the Hebraic attitudes. The Babylonian view of human existence
was far more optimistic than that of the Hebrews.
The so-called Canaanites were another important near eastern Semitic people. They occupied
the region of the coast of the eastern Mediterranean Sea from as early as 3000 bce. Really there
were a series of apparently Semitic city-based civilizations in this region— each being in turn
conquered by semi-nomadic “barbarians.” The Hebrews, or Israelites, who invaded the territory
around 1250 bce, were just another in this series. We know most about this civilization, identified
in the Old Testament as “Canaan,” from texts found at Ras Shamra (Ugarit) on the Syrian coast
From this material it seems that the Canaanites had an ambivalent attitude toward what might be
termed “evil.” Ultimately, they saw the world locked in a struggle between the forces of life —
represented by Ba’al and his sister Anath — and death—represented by Mot There seems to be a
recognition of this fact and an acceptance of its reality.(41)
From this brief survey of some non-Hebraic religious attitudes it is clear that the polytheistic
systems of Semitic religion were not particularly obsessed with the evil nature of the world or of
humanity. However, the Mesopotamian Semitic evidence does show an early predisposition
toward a notion of “original sin.” At the same time it is very difficult to talk in terms of a left-hand
path / right-hand path dichotomy in early Sumerian or Semitic forms. This is probably due to the
48
fact that we do not possess enough knowledge about these people’s philosophical understandings
of the relevant issues. Gilgamesh stands out as a heroic individuated being, possessed of self-
consciousness who desires immortality— which would qualify him at least in pan as a
paradigmatic figure on the left-hand path. It is most likely that the manifold and ambivalent
traditions of early Mesopotamian and near eastern religion, like the old Indo-European or Egyptian
traditions, contain the seeds of what will develop into a right-hand path / left-hand path dichotomy.
In the view of the orthodox philosophies of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam the religious systems
of Canaan and Babylon (as well as that of Egypt) were fundamentally “wicked,” i.e. essentially if
not left-hand path at least open to the values of the left-hand path, among others. This allowance
for such multifaceted religious freedoms would in and of itself be theological grounds for
condemnation from an orthodox monotheistic perspective. But no such dichotomy was really
possible until after the Hebrew synthesis.
The Orthodox Hebrew Synthesis
of the Right-Hand Path
The Hebrew or Israelite synthesis of their own primitive nomadic Semitic beliefs with elements
from the traditions of the Egyptians and Canaanites, as well as the Babylonians and Iranians, took
place over a long period of time between about 1750 and 500 bce. Hebraic nomads had become
somewhat settled in the region around Hebron in the earliest phase— while somewhat later the
Israelites (or more accurately the Arameans) settled down in the region of Shechem. These tribes
lived on the fringes of the urbanized apparently indigenous Canaanite society. These Arameans had
probably begun to assimilate certain features of the Canaanite religion during the time between
1750 and 1250 bce. Into this region came a third wave of Hebraic settlers following about 1250
bce. These were probably a mixture of Hebrew tribes that had been settled in Egypt for several
centuries and perhaps some Egyptian and other non-Hebraic peoples who had been outwardly
Hebraicized during the exodus from Egypt under the leadership of a (former) Egyptian priest
named Moses. An important synthesis of ancient Hebraic, Canaanite and Egyptian philosophies
took place in this cultural context during the centuries between 1200 and 600 bce. The Israelite
kingdom was utterly conquered by the Babylonians in 587, and from that time to 538 the Israelites
lived in exile within Babylonia— the so-called Babylonian captivity. There they further assimilated
Babylonian — but especially also Iranian lore — which is the most important catalytic element in
the development of a Hebraic or Judaic “philosophy of evil.”
When looking at the Hebrew-Judaic material, i.e. canonical and apocryphal Biblical literature
of that tradition, it must be remembered that these myths do not — as popularly assumed —
constitute a continuous and coherent narrative. They are made up of fragments of myths and
legends often pieced together with little or no effort being made in the text to make the narrative
consistent The first example of this occurs in Genesis, where one complete and coherent version
of the creation myth is offered (1:2-4) and then later another quite different yet equally complete and
coherent version is given (II: 4-25). The former is certainly an older version, the other being added
later (probably after the Babylonian Captivity)- This is typical of Hebraic mythology, but is an
aspect of it usually clouded by popular assumptions that it is a consistent and unified “revealed”
text, rather d»?n the product of centuries of re-editing by historically and cross-culturally influenced
writers. (42)
The only original and uni que ideas the ancient Hebrews might have had on the subject of this
aspect of “evil” have been submerged under layers of assimilations from other cultures. It seems
likely that the Hebraic immigrants from Egypt brought with them a theological and ritual structure
that had been heavily influenced by Egyptian thinking. It has been speculated that Moses was
influenced by the ideas of the monotheistic reforms of the pharaoh Akhnaten, and it is further
possible that the Hebraic ideas of who or what might oppose die divine plan was influenced by the
shape of the established cult of Set during in XIXth dynasty (1300-1200 bce). The end of this
dynasty is the time most likely during which the “exodus” of the Semitic tribes form Egypt took
place. The monotheistic reform of Hebrew religion undertaken by Moses would naturally lead to a
model of belief in which the “One God,” called by Moses “Yahweh,” could be opposed in his
49
plans by another force in the cosmos. Before these reforms were begun, Hebraic polytheism
would have accounted for “evil” — i.e., death and disease — as a part of a whole patchwork of
cosmic reality— as the Canaanites had. So in Mosaic monotheism, perhaps coupled with
knowledge of the principle represented by Set, the potential ground work was laid for this cosmic
opposition. In reality, however, awareness of the full implications of this potential took centuries
t0 d ^the third wave of Hebraic migrations came into the Levant, archaeological evidence strongly
indicates that far from destroying everyone and everything in the “Promised Land,” to make it pure
for “God’s Chosen,” (Joshua 1-18) the Canaanite “Land of Milk and Honey” almost completely
seduced the Hebrews, as did the Moabite god, Ba’al-Peor (Numbers 25). The Hebraic religion
from the time of the exodus to the Babylonian Captivity indicates a continuous assimilation of
Canaanite myths and cult forms— and periodic opposition to this ongoing tendency by the so-
called prophets. . _ . ,
The Canaanite influence on the Hebraic concepts of “evil” comes in one form in the idea of a
cosmic conflict between the forces of life (Ba’al) and death (Mot). The Hebrew word for death is
MOT (mot). Also the notion of a cosmic rebellion on the part of younger gods to overthrow older
gods is very strong in Canaanite mythology(43) where we see that Ba’al is not only locked in
combat with Death (Mot), but he is also trying to overthrow the older god, El. El is a “Name of
God” also taken over into Hebrew, see El Shaddai ), and in the plural Elohim. The plural can be
used in Hebrew to indicate the magnitude of something without necessarily implying that there is
actually more than one of them.
As far as the Babylonian influence is concerned, it probably came more indirectly through the
agency of Canaanite theology than directly from the Babylonian into the Hebrew. This was true
until the time of the Babylonian Captivity, at which time the Hebraic, now Judaic, theology was
opeued to two great direct influences: Babylonian learning, and Iranian cosmology and doctrine.
During the period of the Babylonian Captivity a learned priestly tradition developed within
Judaism. The attitude of this priestly tradition toward “evil” was twofold. First it is the result of the
lust of the “Sons of God” (Heb. bene elohim ) for the daughters of men. (Gen. VI: 1-7) Tie
resulting mixture of divine and human natures ends in the revelation of forbidden divine
knowledge to humanity by the “Sons of God.” In the “Enochian” literature there are lists of the
(demonic) angels and the categories of “forbidden knowledge” they reveal to mankind. (I Enoch 8)
“Thns the myth links the origin of culture and the origins of evil in the world... Lust causes the
transgression of the boundary between divine and human; this results in humans learning
forbidden mysteries, and this in turn leads us to the corruption of the earth.”(44) This myth of the
origin of forbidden knowledge which results in the influx of “evil” is a parallel alternative (or
allomorph) of the better known Edenic myth.
Evil is therefore associated both with knowledge and carnal existence — one an evil of the
psyche, the other an evil of the flesh. These two poles will prove to be ongoing features of schools
of the left-hand path in the western world.
Although in the earliest phase the Hebrew myth of the Garden of Eden, as well as the whole
cosmology found in Genesis (1-2), is of Semito-Sumerian origin, the paradigmatic
correspondences with Ir anian mythology seem too close to ignore totally.(45) It is most likely that
the basic structures of the Edenic myth were taken into Judaic lore from the body of Canaanite-
Babylonian traditions and that only later were some of the interpretations of the myths
“enlightened” by more abstract Iranian thought, which, along with Hellenic ideas, would form the
basis of the secret tradition in Judaism (Kabbalah, etc.). These aspects will be discussed in more
detail in chapter 4 concerning gnosis. In any event we again have an alternate way in which “evil,”
in the form of divine knowledge , is introduced to humanity. This myth can be said to be a part of
the lore of the left-hand path only in the traditions of non-Zoroastrian Iranian systems (e.g.
Mithraism) or in some of the myriad of Gnostic sects (e.g. the Ophites).
50
The Hamitic Left-Hand Path
The Cult of Set
Set is an Egyptian god-form that became a model of the paragon of evil in the latter days of the
civilization. But that was not always the case with Set. Although Set was not always considered
“evil ” the characteristics which he displayed remained more or less consistent. It is the culture and
its values which changed. We are, of course, especially interested in understanding this ancient
god-form as much as possible due to the present day importance and influence of the Temple of Set
on the contemporary left-hand path.
The culture of the Nile civilization had developed to a level of unique and independent existence
before any significant contact was made with the Sumerian civilization around 3000 bce(46) — this
influence seemed only to provide impetus to an already ancient culture. Egypt began to take cultural
shape around 5000 BCE, and to have become a distinct civilization in the pre-histone period
between 3800 and 3200 bce. From these foundations Egyptian civilization would continue in its
singular and culturally independent form until its loss of political independence to Rome in 42 bce
with the death of Cleopatra. But the fact that knowledge of hieroglyphics continued to be preserved
by Egyptian priests and scribes until the 5th century ce(47) indicates that we are dealing with an
intellectual culture with a continuous living legacy of at least four thousand years. Thus the
Egyptian civilization is the oldest, most continuous culture known to us. The only possible rival to
this claim would be the Chinese civilization which has far more recent roots (about 1500 bce), but
which actually continues to the present day.
It is probable that in most of its fundamental aspects Egyptian religion had reached a refined
and highly articulated stage of development by the beginning of the Dynastic Period around 3100-
2750 bce. (48) Although at this time the material culture found along the Nile between the
Mediterranean and present-day Aswan was a fairly unified one, politically (and perhaps
religiously— as the “politics” of the region was heavily influenced by cultkjnstitutions) the land
was divided into the northern delta region (Lower Egypt) and the rest of the Nile valley to the south
(Upper Egypt). From the most archaic period it seems that a hawk-god (Hera/Horus) dominated in
the north and a god symbolized by an unidentified beast (Suta/Set H ^ ) ruled in the south.
51
According to traditional Egyptian history, the north effectively conquered the south and unified
the country in 3100 BCE under the first pharaoh, Menes, with his capital in the delta city of
Memphis. Although the symbol of the unified country and unified cosmic principles represented by
the dominant gods in each region is one depicting Homs and Set as a bipolar but single entity,
there seems to have been the tendency to consider Set as the inferior, enemy aspect from this
earliest beginning. However, it can not be overemphasized that the essence and power of Set was
highly valued and honored by Egyptians until the close of the XXth dynasty (about 1170 bce).
The continuity of the value of Sedan ritual and magical symbolism can be seen clearly in the
double crown of the pharaoh, which is made up of the red crown of northern Egypt and the white
crown of southern Egypt, and the scepters of was $ and tcham £, which are clear symbolic
representations of the Set-animal. These scepters were signs of the divine power which could be
wielded by the gods and their incarnate agents, the pharaohs.
“Orthodox” Egyptian religion seems to have been dominated by two concepts or principles—
the regulation of the cosmic/agricultural cycle embodied in the annual rising of the waters of the
Nile which ensured material prosperity, and the continuance of the life of the individual in a
transcendental realm beyond this world. There does not seem to be a shred of evidence beyond the
statements of Herodotus (II, 123) that the Egyptians believed in any sort of earthly reincarnation or
metemp sychosis. (49)
It could easily lead to misunderstandings if the right-hand path / left-hand path distinction were
made too early or too deeply when trying to comprehend the historical development of Egyptian
religion. In many ways early Egyptian religion was much like the Sumerian or ancient Indo-
European in that the stria moral dichotomy of “good” versus “evil” was lacking. However, as time
went on the Egyptians pioneered this dichotomizing in a way very similar to that of the
Zoroastrians in Persia.
The roots of one prototype of the right-hand path in the west is to be found in the Egyptian
cosmic/agricultural cult built around the regular cycles of the rising of the Nile, perhaps coupled
with the extreme isolation and xenophobia of the Egyptian land and culture. This religious and
mythical tradition eventually became embodied in the cult of Osiris. This cult promoted and
developed the idea of the regular and internally ordered cycles of existence and the resurrection of
the body in a transcendent realm, which was perhaps understood in some way parallel to the cycles
of nature experienced in the Nile valley. By the time of the ultimate development of the Osirian cult
in the time of the New Kingdom (and Ptolemaic Period) it constituted an exclnsionist right-hand
path cult predicated on the harmonizing of human activity with the cycles of nature. These cycles
were in turn symbolized by the community of Egyptian gods and goddesses.
The Egyptian word for “a god” was neter (pi. neteru). Erik Homung devoted a whole study to
this and other terms for “god” in Egyptian. The etymology of the word is unclear.(Homung, pp.
33-42) But his conclusion on its meaning in part states:
In their constantly changing nature and manifestations, the Egyptian gods resemble
the country’s temples, which were never finished and complete, but always “under
construction.
The gods of Egypt... are formulas rather than forms, and in their world one is
sometimes as if displaced into a world of elementary particles.... A god is combined
with another and becomes a new being with new characteristics, and then in the next
moment separates into a number of entities. What he is remains hidden, but his
luminous trail can be seen, his reaction with others is clear, and his actions can be
felt He is material and spiritual, a force and a figure, he is manifest in changing
forms that should be exclusive, but we know that within all this something exists and
exercises power.(50)
But there was one who stood against the other neteru by virtue of his very character— Set As
we have already seen, the cult of Set stretches well back into the very beginning of Egyptian
culture, especially in Upper Egypt From the very beginning and throughout his history Set seems
52
to have stood for 1) opposition to certain natural processes, 2) the outside (desert, foreign lands,
etc.), 3) power or force (physical or magical), and 4) disturbance of the natural order caused by the
activity of these factors. These characteristics were at first seen as a necessary balance within the
whole of the cosmos, but in time these very factors would become the programmatic paradigm for
evil as seen from the Osirian Egyptian viewpoint
Originally, however. Set was not thought of as evil so much as he was considered
overwhelmingly powerful . Homung writes concerning the Egyptian gods and evil:
The gods of Egypt can be terrifying, dangerous, and unpredictable, but they cannot
be evil. Originally this was true even of Seth, the murderer of Osiris. Battle, constant
confrontation, confusion, questioning of the established order, in all of which Seth
engages as a sort of “trickster/’ ar all necessary features of the existent world and of
the limited disorder that is essential to living order. (51)
The “political” factor has perhaps been over-emphasized in many discussions of how and why
Set became a paragon of evil in the Egyptian system. It is true that he was the major god of the
earlier subjugated Upper Egypt and that he was identified as the god of foreign forces of the
Semitic Hyksos people who invaded and dominated Egypt from about 1700 to 1550 bce, and that
the conflict between the Osirian priesthood and those of Amen and Set were heavily overlaid with
what today we might call “political” factors.
But it also remains true that in his very essence Set represents something which is almost
always treated with suspicion: the human psyche in opposition to the natural vehicle of the body,
expressed as a force from the outside , giving humanity a power to disturb the natural cosmos
around it Set was die god of the outsider and foreigner and represents that quality in the Egyptian
pantheon and society. Among the gods only Set was possibly truly immortal.(Bonnet, p. 714;
Homung pp. 157-158.) Set has die power and will “to act against law and order 7 ’ in the
universe.(Cf. Bonnet, p. 714.) Here is the essence of why the cult of Set is seen as a prototype of
the left-hand path in the western tradition.
Unfortunately the Egyptian tradition, despite the great number of ancient documents available,
remains one of the most difficult to understand on a consistent philosophical basis today. This is
due in part to the concrete mode of expression of (pre-Hellenic) Egyptian philosophy, and in part
due to their latter-day attempts to vilify and darken the function of Set— but also largely due to the
Egyptian habit of ritual henotheism. As opposed to the Sumerian and Indo-European tendency to
identify certain principles or functions with certain god-forms, the Egyptians would identify
virtually any and all functions with practically any god-form or name. This made it very easy for
them to keep all of the important functions and symbols of Set— by transferring them to gods such
as Amen-Ra, Thoth and Anubis. In the latest times it seemed of the utmost importance to avoid the
use of the actual name of Set or the depiction of the “Set-animal.”
Already in the XIXth dynasty the epithet “follower of Set” was being used peijoritavely. A
scribe named Kenhirkhopeshef (who died around 1191 bce) wrote a papyrus in which he
described the “Marks of the Followers of Set” The papyrus is in poor condition, hence the gaps
in the text, but the description is clear enough:
The god in him is Set... he is a man of the people - He dies by a death of fallings ...
sinews ... He is one dissolute of heart on the day of judgment... discontent in his
heart If he drinks beer he drinks it to engender strife and turmoil. The redness of the
white of his eye is this god. He is one who drinks what he detests. He is beloved of
women through his greatuess — the greatness of his loving them. Though he is a
royal kinsman he has the personality of a man of the people... He will not descend
into the west, but is placed on the desert as a prey to rapacious birds... He drinks
beer so as to engender turmoil and disputes... He will take up weapons of warfare
— He will not distinguish the married woman from ... As to any man who opposes
him he pushes... Massacre arises in him and he is placed in the Netherworld...(52)
53
From this description we can infer some clues as to the antinomian nature of some of the
ancient Setian practices. When actual human beings are referred to as “followers of Set” in the
ancient literature, it is usually their behavior disruptive to the order around them that is sited as the
chief characteristic they demonstrate.^)
By the twilight of the Egyptian culture from the XXUnd dynasty and into the Ptolemaic and
Roman periods, the Osirian cult carried out a virtual “inquisition” against the Setian cult,
eradicating the images and temples of the god and celebrating festivals by torturing crocodiles—
which they thought embodied the god Set. The only philosophical haven for Setian principles was
in the Hellenized Gnostic sects in Egypt.
It is perhaps in this magical context of Hellenized Egyptian culture that Set reaches his greatest
state of philosophical development In one magical papyrus (Paris = PGM IV) Set is called the
“Ruler over the Gods,” and even the “Creator of the Gods.” To a certain extent this may be
explained by the old Egyptian magical tradition of henotheistic formulas, but there seems to be
more at work here. It appears that during the first few centuries of this era (about 100 to 400 ce)
within a sect of Gnostics known as the “Sethians” there occurred a great synthesis of Greek
philosophy, Egyptian religion and magic, Judaic mythology and theology, as well as other
elements from Iranian and other magico-religious systems in the eastern Mediterranean region. (54)
The ancient Egyptian god Set (Gk. XqG = Seth) became identified with, or passed into Hebrew
mythology as, Seth (Heb. STh)— especially in Gnostic sects. But we do not have to go into
Hebrew lore here. It is clear that the Gnostic interpretation of the “classical” myth of the conflict
between Osiris and Set was interpreted as an analog to the dichotomy between the evil demiurge
Ildabaoth (Yahweh Elohim of Genesis) = Osiris and the good (serpentine) god of light = Seth-
Typhon. Thus the Gnostic Sethian sect could indeed be interpreted as a sort of Hellenized
philosophical revival of the ancient Egyptian cult of Set In fact the remnants of “orthodox”
Egyptian religion referred to the Gnostics as a whole as “the sons of Typhon (= Set)” In this
Gnostic epilog to the history of the cult of Set, it can be seen clearly that the ancient philosophical
meaning of Set as a god of opposition to natural static cycles of existence who enters nature from a
position outside it to exercise his transformative power to disturb the natural order— was either
continued or revived by the Hellenized Gnostic Egyptians of the early centuries of this era.
It has been theorized that the cult and figure 5 Set had some influence on the formation of the
name and character of the Hebrew and eventually Christian Satan . This would be possible chiefly
due to the influences that might have passed into Hebrew lore during the period in which the
Hebrews were in Egypt and due to the fact that they seem to have been led from Egypt, probably
around 1250 bce by an Egyptian priest, named Mesy , Moses. The Egyptian msy, son, is also
found in the name Re-msy or Rameses, “son of Re.”(55)
The name Set probably has no etymological connection to the Semitic stn (Heb. satan, Arab.
shaitan ). But the names were doubtlessly associated at an early time among the Hebrews. In the
syncretic, Hellenized world reflected in the Greco-Egyptian magical papyri, it seems that Seth-
Typhon may not only be linked with Satanic aspects, but with the One God of the Hebrews,
Yahweh, as well. This is because the writers of the papyri were interested Yahweh (YHVH
/IAO) as an expression of raw cosmic power on a physical level, not in his supposed theological
role in orthodox Hebrew lore. Iao was “creator of this world”— and so his name could cause
further magical transformations in it A tendency of humans to “diabolize” the gods of their
neighbors seems to be a constant theme, and a cause for continuing difficulties to historians of
religious ideas.
We can hardly tell much about the ways in which the ancient Setians approached the essential
questions of the left-hand path. But given the general characteristics of the god himself, it seems
likely that the Setians of old practiced something very much akin to what we are calling the left-
hand path. Perhaps one of the reasons why the sect was so persecuted is that it offered a path of
deification for more than just the pharaohs.
54
Notes for Chapter 3
(1) For a discussion of the original homeland of the Indo-Europeans, see J. B. Mallory, In Search of the Indo-
Europeans (London: Thames and Hudson, 1989),
(2) See Mircea Eliade History of Religious Ideas (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982) vol. n, p. 257.
(3) There were a number of Mystery Schools in ancient Greece, see Walter Buikert, Ancient Mystery Cults
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987)
(4) See Eliade History, vol. I, pp. 299-301.
(5) Eliade History , vol. n, p. 187.
(6) Eliade History, vol. n, pp. 189-190.
(7) Eliade History, vol. n, p. 190.
(8) See Plato’s Republic (edited by Comford), p. 351.
(9) Eliade History, vol. n, p. 190.
(10) See William K. C. Guthrie Orpheus and Greek Religion (New York: Norton, 1966, 2nd ed.) and Eliat
History, vol. n, p. 190.
(11) Eliade History , vol. n, p. 191.
(12) See the biographies of Pythagoras recorded by Kenneth S. Guthrie, ed. The Pythagorean Sourcebook and
Library (Grand Rapids, MI: Phanes, 1987), pp. 57-156.
(13) See Robin Waterfield, trans., Theology of Arithmetic (Grand Rapids, Mt Phanes, 1988).
(14) Quoted from “Little Gidding” by T. S. Eliot.
(15) For a study of the soul in Greek tradition see Erwin Rhode, Psyche: The Cult of Souls and Belief,
Immortality Among the Greeks (Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1972) and for an introduction to the topic
in northern Europe, see Stephen E. Flowers, ‘Toward an Archaic Germanic Psychology,” Journal of Indo-European
Studies, 11:1-2 (1983), pp. 117-138.
(16) See Gershom Scholem, Kabbalah (New York: New American Library, 1978), passim .
(17) See Reynold A. Nicholson, Studies in Islamic Mysticism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967,
2nded.)
(18) No real school of Neoplatonic Christian mysticism arose, but individual philosophers or theologians used
Neoplatonic concepts, see A. H. Armstrong, The Cambridge History of Later Greek and Early Medieval Philosophy
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967.)
(19) The most coherent presentation of Epicureanism is by Lucretius On the Nature of the Universe, trans. R.
i flthaTn (Harmondsworth, UK; Penguin, 1951). Also see the general introduction provided by Jason L. Saunders,
Greek and Roman Philosophy after Aristotle. (New York: Free Press, 1966), pp. 13-57.
(20) The classic text of later Stoicism is that of Marcus Aureleus, Meditations (Baltimore: Penguin, 1964). See
also the presentation by Jason L. Saunders, Greek and Roman Philosophy after Aristotle. (New York: Free Press,
1966), pp. 59-150.
(21) See Edgar C. Polom6, “Some Comments of VOluspd Stanzas 17-18.” In: PolomS, E.C. (ed.) Old Norse
Literature and Mythology: A Symposium. (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1969), pp. 268.
(22) Concerning the runic initiaiton of Odin, see E.O.G. Turville-Petre, Myth and Religion of the North (New
York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1964), p. 42 ff.
(23) Turville-Petre, Myth and Religion, p. 63 ff.
(24) Concerning the spiritual gifts of the Germanic gods see Folome, “Some Comments..,,” pp. 265ff.
(25) See Turville-Petre, Myth and Religion, pp. 55 ff.
(26) For a comparison of the Celtic Lugh and the Germanic Odin, see Jan de Vries, Keltische Religion
(Stuttgart Koblbammer, 1961), p. 54 or Edred Thorsson, The Book of Ogham (Sl Paul, MN; Llewellyn, 1992),
pp. 36-40.
(27) See Jan de Vries, Altgermanische Religionsgeschichte (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1957), voL II, p. 27.
(28) Recorded by Jacob Grimm, Teutonic Mythology trans. S. Stallybrass (New York: Dover, 1966), vol IV,
pp. 1709-1736.
(29) See Stephen E. Flowers Runes and Magic (New York: Lang, 1986), pp. 334-335, et passim.
(30) John Bennett “Introduction” In: P. D. Ouspensky Talks with A Devil, p. 1.
(31) Bennett “Introduction” In: P. D. Ouspensky Talks with A Devil, pp. 1-2.
55
(32) M. P. Dragomanov Notes on the Slavic Religio-Ethical Legends: The Dualistic Creation of the World .
trans. E-W. Count. (= Russian and East European Series 23)
(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1961), p. 131.
(33) Dragomanov Notes on the Slavic Religio-Ethical Legends , pp. 10.
(34) A review of the correlations between Zoroastrian and Hebrew traditions is provided by Neil Forsyth, Old
Enemy: Satan and the Combat Myth (Princeton: University of Princeton Press, 1989).
(35) On the existence of a pre-Yah wist Hebrew religion see S.H. Hooke Middle Eastern Mythology
(Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1963), pp. 103 ff.
(36) For a general introduction to Sumerian civilization see Samuel N. Kramer, The Sumerians (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1963).
(37) Int ernal evidence shows a close connection between the Sumerian world and that of the old Indus valley
civilization Kramer, pp. 280ff.
(38) Kramer, Sumerians, p. 42.
(39) Eliade History, vol. I, p. 73.
(40) See J.B. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1955, 2nd ed.), pp. 391-392.
(41) For a convenient survey of Canaanite mythology see Hooke, Middle Eastern, pp. 79 ff.
(42) For a convenient introduction to this problem, see S.H. Hooke Middle Eastern, pp. 103-164.
(43) Forsyth, Old Enemy, p. 44.
(44) Forsyth, Old Enemy , p. 174.
(45) See above and Eliade, Patterns, pp. 290-294.
(46) On the relationship between Egypt and Mesopotamia see Henri Frankfort, Kingship and the Gods (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1948).
(47) E. A. Wallis Budge, Egyptian Language (London: Routledge and Keg an Paul, 1958), p. 15.
(48) Paul Jordan, Egypt: The Black Land (Oxford: Phaidon, 1976), pp. 78-83 and Frankfort, Kingship, pp. xxiv-
xxv.
(49) See the Lexihon der Aegyptologie , vol V, p. 13.
(50) Erik Homing, Conceptions of God in Ancient Egypt: The One and the Many . tr. John Baines (Ithica, NY:
Cornell
University Press, 1982), pp. 256-257.
(51) Homung, Conceptions of God, p. 213.
(52) John Romer, Ancient Lives: Daily Life in Egypt of the Pharoahs (New Yotk: Henry Holt, 1984), p. 67.
(53) Romer, Ancient Lives , pp. 90; 92.
(54) Jean Doresse, The Secret Books of the Egyptian Gnostics (Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions, 1986), pp.
249-309.
(55) Eliade, History, voL I, p. 178.
56
Chapter 4
The First Millennium
At the dawn of the time that we have come to call the “Common Era” the religious and
philosophical cultures of the Mediterranean and near eastern regious were in a high state of
flux and dynamism. Politically and militarily the Romans had become the dominant force in
that part of the world, but in the realm of philosophy Hellenic thought remained the most
prestigious. But from the east — especially from the Iranian cultural sphere — religious
systems of all sorts (dualistic and non-dualistic) had a continual influence on the
development and reformation of sects in the west
In philosophy the most important school of thought was that of Neo-Platonism, which
can be dated from about 244 CE, when its chief proponent, Plotinus, became influential in
Rome. This philosophy, essentially based on a system of Platonic idealism, was to be a
decisive infl uence' on all schools of “mysticism ” the Judaic Kabbalah, Islamic Sufism, as
well as Christian schools of mysticism. Hellenic thought also became the matrix for the
reception of Iranian systems, and from such a synthesis of east and west many sects such
as Mithraism, “Hermeticism,” and various Gnostic systems were formed.
At this time certain sects or cults found great favor among contemporary sophisticated
and philosophically trained Roman politicians, e.g. Mithraism or various Egyptian cults,
while others — especially those directly connected with Judaism were reviled as being
“paradoxical and degraded ” (1) This is mentioned here only as a way of in some small
measure giving a more balanced view to the popular image (essentially fostered by
Hollywood) of the sophisticated and morally superior Jews and Christians being
surrounded by barbaric and cruel Romans.
It is in this cultural milieu that Christianity, which was essentially in its earliest phase a
Judaic heresy — had its origins. Early Christian doctrine can be shown to be a system
developed over the years between the first and fourth centuries from a complex synthesis of
Judaic, Hellenic (Neo-Platonic) and Iranian thought. From its be ginnin g Christianity
adopted and adapted elements from the various systems — theological as well as socio¬
political — which it sought to supersede.
This is obviously not the place to go into all the details of this process, so I limit myself
to one of the most essential aspects of this development— the place and nature of “evil.”
There have been many attempts to create a “Christian philosophy.” This is perhaps a
contradiction in terms as a philosophy implies a system of open-ended inquiry, while
“Christian” implies that the final conclusion is already fixed, and that the philosophical
jargon is just being used to sound more convincing to those impressed by such rhetoric.
These attempts were utterly thwarted by the fact that there seemed to be an ongoing effort to
fuse two quite distinct philosophical cosmologies and concepts of “evil” into the Christian,
essentially Judaic, world view.
The first of these two philosophical stances is that of Neo-Platonism, where we find the
following model:
57
In Christian parlance, the triad of creative principles would be renamed “the Father, Son
(Logos), and Holy Spirit” Here we see a gradual or hierarchical model, Le. one that posits
a gradual decline or descent of Being (= the Good/the One) until it utterly ceases to “Be.”
At the point where there is a lack of Being is the origin of evil. The Good is unity and
Being, while evil is a negative state, a lack of Being. Each stage along the way down the
gradual scale of Being is a descent into “relative evil” One way to visualize this is to
imagine a flashlight shining into the night sky, as its beam grows less dense and more
diffuse the darkness which is considered “evil” becomes more dense until there is no more
light. In this model evil does not exist in any real way— it is by definition a lack of reality.
This negative conception of evil, evil as a lade of Being was the one eventually adopted
and promoted by orthodox Christianity, but another conception existed along side it (within
orthodox thought as well as in numerous Christian heresies). This was the idea of positive
evil , i.e. it posits a real existence of a force of darkness identified as “evil ” Historically this
model was pioneered and perfected in Iranian systems derived from that of the prophet
Zoroaster. The simplest representation of this model would be:
Darkness-> ® <-Light
58
Here Darkness and Light are equally real and are locked in combat over the world and
mankind which are considered mixtures of darkness and light This system was to find a
radical proponent in the prophet Mani (about 216-276 CE) who synthesized Christian,
Buddhist, and Iranian ideas. Such dualism was to be the cornerstone of many of the
heresies that orthodox Christianity battled for centuries. The root of the problem, or at least
part of it, lies in the degree to which so-called orthodox Christianity and its scriptures have
themselves been imbued with Iranian dualism. One only needs to be remember that
Augustine of Hippo was at one time a Manichean, or that the Hebraic myth of Paradise was
perhaps heavily influenced by Persian (Iranian) thought, to realize why it seems so natural
to ascribe reality to evil. Although from a “philosophical” perspective the theologian might
say that evil is a lack of Being, on most other levels belief in a Devil with positive powers
of evil becomes attractive to resist
Gnosticism and the Left-Hand Path
Although the ideology that is commonly known as Gnosticism has its ultimate roots in
Iranian dualism, its exact shape was determined by a confluence of philosophical,
theological and mythological streams from Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Platonism, mystery
religions Egyptian magic and philosophy, and the nascent form of Christianity. In fact.
Gnosticism is a parallel development of “orthodox Augustinian Christianity.” Gnosticism is
the Judeo-Christian myth superimposed over the philosophical and cosmological patterns
of Iranian dualism, as orthodox Christianity is that same myth applied to the Platonic and
Neo-Platonic scheme.
Where Gnosticism departs from the Iranian model is in the belief that the world and the
physical universe is actually the creation of the evil, dark spirit, not just the zone between
the spirits of light and darkness. For the Gnostic, material creation is a priori evil and must
therefore be the result of a creative act on the part of an “evil god.”
In the time between the 1st and 2nd century, the period of Gnostic foundations, there
were actually dozens of major schools of Gnosticism, e.g. those of Simon (Magus),
Basilides, Marcion, Valentinus and sects, e.g. the Canutes, Barbelites, Sethians, Ophites
and Borborians.(2) One of the major reasons for this tremendous plurality of systems is the
fact that Gnostics did not attempt to unify their doctrines into an “orthodox” system, but
rather encouraged the creation of diverse schools of thought. This put them at a distinct
social and political disadvantage viz a viz the “orthodox” Christians who strove to create a
monolithic body of catholic doctrine whereby “heretics” (such as the Gnostics) and pagans
could be identified and subsequently eradicated. This process of attempted elimination of
heretical and pagan schools of thought — which has ultimately failed — went on for
centuries into the modem age. Some vestiges of it may still be seen in fringe groups in
society today in the form of free-lance hate groups using Christian dogmas to attempt to
suppress religious freedom.
There are many St Cyrils waiting to martyr today’s Hyposias and bring about a new
Hark age. “the got the library at Alexandria— they’re not getting mine!” as the button
reads.
One of the most important of the early Gnostics, perhaps a true lord of the left-hand
path from antiquity, is Simon Magus. Mostly we know about his philosophy from treatises
written against it by early “Church Fathers.” Their recounting of his philosophy seems
rather accurate, as it can be corroborated with other actual Gnostic texts, but the apocryphal
tales about his magical duels with the apostles, and so forth, seems like typical sectarian
propaganda. (3) The figure of Simon Magus is perhaps best known from the account given
of Him in Acts (VIII), although the Simon mentioned there may in fact be another one and
not the Gnostic “Magus” vilified by the Church Fathers.
Simon was bom around 15 CE in Samaria, a region known for its irregular culture
from a Jewish point of view, he was the son of an ostensibly Jewish sorcerer, bnt was
educated in Alexandria in Egypt. Simon became the disciple of an “Arab” named
59
Dositheus, who had perhaps been a follower of “John the Baptist” This Dositheus may or
may not have been the author of a text found in the “Nag Hammadi Library” called the
Three Steles of Seth (or the Revelation of Dositheus).(4) Simon is said to have traveled
widely, to Persia and Arabia, as well as Egypt and elsewhere always in search of magical
lore. In any event, when Dosithens died (around 29 CE) Simon took over his school
called, until then the Dositheans, now the Simonians. Dositheus had had a female disciple
named Helene, and Simon later traveled with his main disciple, a former slave and
prostitute from Tyre, also known by the name Helene. However, they were probably not
the same person. But it is certain that Simon did have a companion whore with whom he
practiced erotic magic, some of which made use of semen and menstrual blood. (A practice
shared by tantrism and later sexual magic practiced by Aleister Crowley.) Because this and
other features of Simon’s practices which link up with certain eastern ideas, it is most likely
that the accounts were not merely propaganda by his enemies. Simon is said to have died in
Rome where he was engaged in a magical contest with the apostles Peter and Paul. One
account has it that he died while trying to fly to heaven (while Peter prayed for his fall). (5)
Another report has it that he was buried alive, but failed to resurrect himself.(6)
It is quite possible that Simon was an initiate of the occidental branch of the “Iranian
mysteries,” hence the appropriateness of his cognomen “Magus.” This priesthood was
quite strong in Mesopotamia and Asia Minor at this time. But Simon’s true importance is
his role as a nexus for certain preexisting ideas, a possible originator of new realizations,
and a teacher of future Gnostic leaders. He was the teacher of Menander, who practiced a
“bath of immortality” in which a visible fire descended into the water to bestow miraculous
power on the initiate. Menander was in turn the teacher of Satuminus and Basilides, both
important Gnostic teachers. (7)
Simon taught a cosmology that was an ingenions synthesis of Iranian dualism and
Platonic idealism. He held that the One, the undivided and eternal Divine Mind (Gk.
Nous), reflected upon and within itself, thus giving rise to the First Thought (Gk. Epinoia)
and thns also the first aeon (Gk. Aiori), also called Ennoia or Sophia , wisdom. Unity is
broken. Duality is begun, and the Fall into manifestation has been set into motion. Hans
Jonas summarizes that “... through the act of reflection the indeterminate and only
negatively describable power of the [One] turns into a positive principle committed to the
object of its thinking, even though that object is itself.”(8) This process of reflection is
continned as successive emanations, each having less of the original Unity of divine Nous.
Simon taught that the One Mind, the True God of Light, had nothing to do with the
creation of the material universe, and that in fact the One Mind was not even aware of its
existence. This world, he taught, was the creation of a wicked demiurge, whom he
identified with the Creator of Jewish tradition. It is because he had determined Yahweh
Elohim to be evil that he concluded that his Laws were also actually wicked and led men to
evil, not to good. This, then, is the root of Simon’s libertinism and antinomiamsm— the
practice of willfully breaking normative codes to attain higher spiritual truths.
In Simon’s system, the First Thought, the Aeon Epinoia , fell through all of the
successive Aeons and was eventually incarnated as a human woman. She had
transmigrated from female body to female body thronghout history as the Rnlers (Gk
Archons ) fought to possess her. She had been Helen of Troy, for example. Simon believed
that he had found the current incarnation of Epinoia in the persona of his consort, Helene,
the whore of Tyre. He also held himself to be the incarnation of the Divine Mind itself. So
in the terrestrial act of saving and redeeming Helene, Simon saw a reflection of the Ultimate
Subject, the Nous, redeeming its First Object, Epinoia .
Many of the doctrines taught by Simon, whether he originated them or not, became
mainstays of Gnostic thought throughout the centuries. Hans Jonas epitomizes his novel
teaching as “...the revolt against the world and its god in the name of absolute spiritual
freedom.”(9) In this bold doctrine Simon Magus shows himself to be a true heir to and
prophet of the left-hand path.
60
Gnostic sects are especially difficult to study because the creation of differing systems
was part of the initiation into them at the highest levels. Leaders were encouraged to
innovate and generate more sects. Bnt there are certain common characteristics among most
of them which make them Gnostic .
The major Gnostic tenets adhered to by most sects are:
1) Dualism , ie. that there is a strict dichotomy between spirit, or that which is
good and created by God, and matter , or that which is evil and created and
ruled by the Archons.
2) Absolute transcendence of God , i.e. God, as the “Father of the Spirit," is
in no way mixed np with the matter of this world.
3) Gnosis. Le. that “salvation” is to be gained by gnosis, “knowledge,” of a
suprarational, experiential kind. This is not intellectual knowledge as we
usually think of it, but a direct comprehension of the transcendent absolute:
God.
4) Election. i.e. the individual Gnostic is “called” or “elected” to his status
from the transcendent source of light beyond the cosmos (natural order).
5) Aions or cycles of existence which act as gradual barriers between this
world and die realm of transcendent light
Some of these tenets are, in some form, shared by other schools of thought such as
Neo-Platonism or Hermeticism but this combination of tenets sets Gnostic sects apart from
all others.
Gnostic sects hold that the material world is ruled by an evil force, and most say that
the material world is actually the creation of the evil demiurge. What might be surprising is
that when Gnostic thinking is applied to the Judeo-Semitic myth of Genesis, a picture
which is the absolute reversal of the conventional understanding emerges. In the Gnostic
mind the (Yahweh) Elohim of Genesis is identified as the demiurge, creator god of this
world— that is, the Evil One.
Yahweh, called Udabaoth by many Gnostic sects, created the world and the natural
parts of humanity, but tried to keep mankind in slavery and darkness, separate from the
transcendent light The savior of humanity is the Serpent (Heb. nachash ) who is the btmser
of light from beyond the cosmos. Especially those schools which extoled the virtues of the
Serpent, e.g. the Ophites (Gk ophis, serpent) and the Naasenes (from a Greek rendering of
Hebrew nachash) could easily be identified on a snperficial level as practitioners of the left-
hand path. Their spiritual aim is to become god-men in life and to maintain their identities
— as spiritual entities — as they pass through the aions to reach the ultimate source of
light. Some see this as a true imilatio Christi.
To Ophite Gnostics the figure of Christ is identified with the Serpent — as the Son of
the Good God. Christ came as a manifestation of the light-bearing SerpenL The
identification between the Serpent and the Messiah can be made on the ground of the Greek
occult science of gematria as well. In the KabbaKstic technique known as gemama. in
which every letter has a numerical equivalent, the Hebrew word for the Serpent of Eden:
nachash (= N.Ch.Sh. = 50 + 8 + 300 = 358) and the word Messiah, Anointed One. King
(M.Sh-Y.Ch. = 40 + 300 + 10 + 8 = 358) work out to be the same. In gematria if two
words have the same numerical value they are in Essence identical on a higher level of
being. The Serpent bronght humanity knowledge (gnosis) of good and evil (Gen 3:1-7)
and can further aid man in gaining the fruit of eternal life, thus making man like God, or
like Christ
Of the five major traits of Gnostic thinkin g mentioned above, all but the radical dualism
is in some way shared by the contemporary intellectual left-hand path philosophy of the
Temple of Set This rejection of radical dualism is also the principal distinction between
what can properly be called Gnosticism and that which can be called Hermeticism.
Gnostics have inherited the basic positive dualism of the Zoroastrians, while the more
precise Hermeticists have maintained the Platonic and hence Neo-Platonic model. This
61
model was perhaps in some sense shared by certain Egyptian priesthoods, and it is
noteworthy that the cradle of this Greco-Egyptian philosophy is to be found along the Nile.
It is, of course, this heterodox synthesis of Hellenic, Semitic, Egyptian and Iranian
ideas which is the oriental matrix of the so-called western magical tradition. Those ideas
were re-synthesized in late medieval and Renaissance western Europe, and then again
renewed — during the “occult revival” of the late 19th and early 20th century. But before
we can fully appreciate the heterodox value of these ideas, we must understand what is
meant by “orthodoxy.”
Christian orthodoxy is really founded on Augustine of Hippo’s synthesis of Neo-
Platonic philosophy and Judeo(-Christian) mythplogy.(lO) Although he wrote extensively
against all of the numerous “heresies” of his day, he too had at one time been an adherent
of Manicheanism. The four pillars of doctrine upon which Augustine’s system of
orthodoxy rests are: 1) that God is a Trinity (Father, Son and Holy Spirit)— three and one
at the same time, 2) that free-will is enjoyed by God absolutely and that man at one time
had this, but 3) man transgressed against God’s commandments and committed original sin
which separates man from God and with which all men are bom, and 4) only the grace
(free-will gift) of God can save a man. What is specifically orthodox Christian about this is
the idea that Jesus (the Son) was a unique historical phenomenon of God’s grace and is the
way by which all men are to be saved.
There is a certain genius of sorts in Augustine’s system in that it is founded on an
irrational basic theological premise (the Trinity ), which is derived from the Neo-Platonic
doctrine of emanations — the Logos emanates from the One and the World Soul is created
by the Logos, man is put in the position of having transgressed against God’s law as a
matter of his own fault — the fault for this can not be laid at God’s doorstep for, after all,
he gave man free-will. Man choose to rebel against God (perhaps in league with Satan) and
is thus eternally separated from God. In this position man can only be “saved” by God’s
gift to him. If a man turns to God the orthodox view is that it is not by his own will or
effort that it has been done, but rather it is a sign of God’s grace that a man does so. Thus
in this system of doctrine, man’s will is utterly devalued— really made nnreal. True free¬
will was only exercised by Adam and the punishment for his transgression is now visited
on every offspring of the human species. This is by far the most complex and convoluted
explanation of a right-hand path philosophy known. One of the main reasons for its
convolution is the historical fact that it represents an attempt to create a dogmatic, inflexible ,
pseudo-rational hybrid between Judaic (Semitic) theology and Hellenic (Indo-European)
ideology. This hybrid seemed workable with Gnostic flexibility; however, submitted to
councils of Church Fathers who approved or disapproved dogmas the cracks in the system
would always be obvious. If we are to understand the historical development of the left-
hand path in the west a firm idea of the essence of the right-hand path is extremely helpful.
It is often tempting to be drawn into discussions of the Judeo-Christian models of evil
when exploring the left-hand path philosophy in the west It must be continually
remembered, however, that in the “west,” as in the “east,” the right-hand path and the left-
hand path are models of spiritual working— not models of “good” versus “evil.” The great
problem in this is that from the right-hand path viewpoint it is usually understood as
precisely that: a battle between good (= the right-hand path) and evil (= the left-hand path).
This is most likely to be explained in terms of the psychology of adherents of the right-
hand path. The essence of “knowledge” for followers of the right-hand path (especially in
the west) tends to be. faith or belief (Gk. pistis). Those who have pistis as the object of their
knowledge — those who are true believers — tend to think always in “binaric”(l 1) terms
of yes/no, right/wrong, good/evil, ad nauseam, Bnt in actuality there is nothing evil about
the left-hand path, in fact most of what contemporary western man likes to point to as
examples of evil are the results of the philosophies of blind faith — the Inquisition,
concentration camps, gulags, and so on.
62
Was Jesus a Lord of the Left-Hand Path?
This may, seem a ludicrous question to ask, but the perfection of the left-hand path
comes about from asking questions. Is it possible that the teacher called Jesus was in fact a
virtual Satanist in his own day and time whose teachings were so corrupted by
unscrupulous followers that what he taught is for all intents and purposes buried in a
morass of conflicting dogmas and doctrines? I can not hope to answer this qnestion fully
here, but I think I can present some provocative evidence suggesting that Jesus was not
what the institution founded in his name later made him out to be. To begin to answer this
question I will use evidence both from within and outside Christian literature.
The criteria for being named a lord of the left-hand path, it will be remembered, are that
the person either developed for himself and taught a magical (willed) system of
evolutionary self-deification with an antinomian embracing of elements within the culture of
the individual considered to be forbidden or taboo (hence “Satanic”). Perhaps shockingly
Jesus fulfills most of these criteria if the evidence is viewed objectively.
Morton Smith’s study, Jesus the Magician, is perhaps the greatest single trove of
information concerning the probable true nature of the “Naasarene ” Smith reports what the
non-Christian contemporaries said of Jesus. (12) For us the important elements of this
report are that he was said to be the illegitimate son of a Roman soldier (named Panthera)
and a prostitute, that he became expert in magic and became “a son of a god” by these
practices, that he taught his followers to despise Jewish Law and to practice a sexually
libertine doctrine of love. Of course, I am well aware that ideological enemies can, and do,
simply make up the wildest most unsubstantiated stories for propagandists reasons. But
surprisingly there is ample evidence for this interpretation within the very Gospel accounts
themselves.
One interesting bit of evidence that, at least to outsiders, Jesus was thought to be a
Satanic or “evil” god — or “son of a god” — is graphically portrayed in a well-known
piece of graffito in the imperial palace on the Palatine frill in Rome (ca. 200 CE):
63
The drawing — scratched in the plaster of a school room wall — depicts a donkey¬
headed figure being crucified with a man raising his hand below the figure. An inscription
reads (in bad Greek): “Alexamenos worships god.” The donkey-headed figure is, in this
cultural context, to be identified with Set-Typhon— by this time a god of evil in the
Helleno-Egyptian mythology. So at least for some Jesus had perhaps been identified with
Set-Typhon. Perhaps he was seen as the “son” of this god? Well, perhaps this is so, as the
Jewish god Yah£weh), in Hellenic manuscripts represented as Iao [pron. ee-ah-oh], was
unequivocally identified with Set-Typhon by die Egyptians themselves. This is fitting since
Set was the “god of foreigners” among the highly xenophobic Egyptians and the Jews were
the largest foreign population in Egypt at the time. Besides the Egyptian (Coptic) word for
donkey just happens to be io or eio — which sounded very much like the Hellenic
representation of Yah\ (13) Evidence inside the Gospels pointing to this symbolic complex
includes Jesus’ riding into Jerusalem on an ass he told his disciples to steal from the town
(ML 21:1-7)
Evidence inside the Gospels shows the antinomian nature of Jesus’ work and
teachings— at least from the viewpoint of the established Jewish culture and religion of his
day. Jesus rejected the practice of the Law. In words reported to be his own he says: “think
not that I am come to send peace upon the earth: I came not to send peace bnt a sword. For
I am come to set a man at variance against his father, etc.” (Mt. 10:34-35). Jesus was a
social revolutionary bent upon the annihilation of the famil y and tribes as the Jews had
known them. In contradistinction to the orthodox Jewish belief in the salvation of the
whole people at a future time, Jesus taught the salvation of the individual here and now:
“... die kingdom of god is within you.” (Lk. 17:21). He not only performed miracles or
magical feats himself but exhorted his followers to emulate him: “Verily, verily I say unto
you, he that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than
these shall he do ...” (Jn. 14:12).
Curiously when Jesus is accused by the Pharisees of casting out demons by the force
of Beelzebnb — ruler of demons — he replies only with an attempt to baffle them with
apparently logical formulas (ML 12:24-27).
But perhaps the most interesting and compelling evidence is comparative. Assuming
that Jesus was in some way a historical person who did things roughly answering to some
of the accounts given in the Gospels, what kind of man would he have been? He fits
perfectly the profile of a magician, of his time and place. If Jesus was a magician arc there
any corollaries to his magical activities elsewhere in the cultures of his exact time and
region? Yes, there is much of it in the form of the Greco-Egyptian magical papyri. (14)
Smith deals with this evidence in. great detail. What emerges is a clear picture of a
Hellenized Jewish magician who, among other things, claimed to be the a son of a god,
used verbal magical formulas to work miracles, and who did not send spirits or demons to
do his work but who contained or absorbed a divine spirit and exerted it directly.
Several papyri outline magical procedures for obtaining a spirit in order to become a
son of a god. One of these (PGM I:42-195)(15) says that the magician shonld purify
himself, go onto a lofty roof and, among other things, blindfold himself with a “black Isis
band.” At one point in the ritual the band is removed and a “falcon will fly down” and drop
a stone as a first sign of the manifestation of the spirit in the magician. This spirit, or
daimon, becomes identified with the magician from an outsider’s viewpoint so the magician
in the words of the papyrus “will be worshipped as a god since [he has] a god as a friend.”
Another papyrus (PGM IV: 154-221) reads in part:
... there will be this sign of divine encounter, but you, aimed by having this
magical soul, be not alarmed. For a sea falcon flies down and strikes yon on
the body with its wings, signifying this: that you should arise. But as for you,
rise up and clothe yourself with white garments and bum on an earthen censer
uncut incense in grains while saying this:
64
T have been attached to your holy form.
I have been given power by your holy name.
I have acquired your emanation of the goods.
Lord, god of gods, master, daimon.
Having done this, return as lord of a godlike nature which is accomplished
though this divine encounter. (16)
The parallel between these magical rituals and the story of the baptism of Jesus (Mk. 1:
9-11) in which he receives a “holy spirit” which appears as a dove flying down from
heaven is remarkable. After this event he is able to perform magical feats by just “saying
the word,” Le. some magical formula or “ mantra ”
A sorcerer who “had” a spirit or daimon might be called in the Greek of that day a
magos (pL magoi) — and was often considered a “divine man.” Such a magos was more
than a mere goes , or sorcerer, who cold only command spirits outside himself. In Jesus’
own time some apparently thought that he had obtained the spirit of the executed John the
Baptist— and worked magic with it But it is the “holy spirit”— that of a god who Jesus
the man seems to have become — which is the true agent of his miracles.
A magos — becanse of his “divine nature” — can cause changes with his “word” (or
directed conscious will) alone. The papyri are full of verbal magical formulas, such as
ablanaihanalba , by which the magos may work his will. There is even one such word
recorded in the Gospel of Mark (5:41) where Jesns heals a little girl with the (supposedly
Aramaic) phrase talitha koumi.
For each of the miracles of Jesus a parallel can be found in the magical literature of his
day. Even the magical power of his own name was enhanced upon his death— for magic
worked with the spirit (or “name”) of an executed criminal was believed to be of special
power. This is, of course, further bolstered by the knowledge that Jesus exhorted his
followers to do this, saying that he would be in them always (e.g. Jn. 14:23; 15:4-9; Mt.
18:20; 28:20).
Jesus was a deified man—just as every magos is. Among many magicians of the time
deification — and immortalization — was the highest goal of the art and practice of mageia
(magic). Jesus’ own declarations of his divinity correspond with the words from magical
papyri in which the magician declares his divine qualities:
Jn. 10:36 “I am the Son of God.”
PGM IV:535 *T am the Son...”
DMP XX:33: “I am the Son of the living God.”
Jn. 6:51 “I am ... the one come from heaven.”
PGM IV: 1018 “I am the one come forth from heaven.”
Jn. 14:6 ‘T am ... the truth...”
PGM V:148 “I am the truth”(17)
But was Jesus a master of the left-hand path? It would appear that from the most
objective evidence and methods of investigation — filtering out the often self-serving
redactions and interpretations of his followers — that the man and magos Jesus was a
practitioner of the left-hand path. He was an antinomian, preaching an abrogation of the
established Jewish Law and was thought to be “Satanic” by his contemporary rivals and
critics (charges he did not directly deny). He taught the “salvation” of the individual—
while practicing the deification of his own individual self. That so much of this comes
through the deliberate (and successful) attempt to transform his teachings into a right-hand
path doctrine is remarkable.
65
The parallels between Jesus and Simon Magus also include the fact that Jesus (despite
what were perhaps later attempts to gloss over the circumstance) had as his consort a
prostitute, Mary Magdelene. This seems to be an essential component in the myth of the
magusX 18) ... ... . , ,
In the final analysis, however, because Christianity as an institution was founded and
promoted by men such as Saul/Paul (who was an avid persecutor of early followers of
Jesus and who was never taught by the “master”) and Jesus’ own brother James (who
rejected his brother as insane in his own lifetime) we can not trust that any of the possible
left-hand path teachings of Jesus survived intact If Jesus was lord of the left-hand path,
his teachings were at once betrayed by a group of his followers so that now no more of his
true doctrines survive than do those of Apollonins of Tyana or Simon Magus. To risk
stating the painfully obvious: All organized forms of orthodox Christianity — eastern or
western, Catholic or Protestant—are monuments of right-hand path intolerance and hatred
of the individual spirit
— Islam and the Left-Hand Path —
In the southern — or middle eastern — tradition no other system of thought more
perfectly embodies the ideals of the right-hand path than orthodox Islam. The very word
means submission— submission to the laws of Allah. Philosophically Islam is the most
radically monotheistic of the religions of the middle east At the same time this radical
theology actually allowed for a great deal of free thought outside the confines of the
religious life— this is why the Muslims of Persia, Egypt and Moorish Spain were able to
become such great collectors and interpreters of Hellenic philosophy and innovators in
many philosophical and scientific areas.(19) The Muslims collected and read the works of
Plato, Aristotle and the Neo-Platonists at a time when such works were considered to be
pure diabolism in ecclesiastical circles in the Christian west
Historically Islam is another cult form inspired by the Judaic or Hebrew mythology. It
was founded by Mohammed (570-632 CE) who spread his form of religion by military
conquest— Holy War {At Jihad). By ten years after the Prophet’s death Islamic armies had
conquered Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Mesopotamia and much of Iran (Persia). By a century
after Mohammed’s death the Moors were moving into France from Spain which had
already fallen into their hands. They were only stopped at the battle of Tours in 732 by
Charles Martel (“the Hammer 7 ’)- But they continued to occupy the Iberian peninsula for 800
more years.
The root essence of Islam lies in the formula known as the shadah: “There is no god but
Allah— and Mohammed is the Messenger of Allah.” Allah is derived from a common
Semitic name for god we also find in Hebrew El. The Arabic form comes from al-Ilah “The
God.” Submission to this creed and to the laws outlined in Mohammed’s book, the Qur’an
or Koran (“the Recitation”) is the essence of Islam.
However, the culture of Islam often allows for certain unexpected irregularities. Once a
man’s outer religions obligations are met in accordance with the rule of custom, he may be
free— if only secretly — to pursue philosophical or magical interests liberated from moral
restrictions. This type of pursuit is most often carried out in certain heterodox sects or
brotherhoods. The main type of such sects are known as the Sufis. Within the context of
Sufism characteristics of the left-hand path are often developed. Two other Islamic sects
which attract some attention in discussions of the left-hand path are the Ishmailis (or
Hashashin) and the Yezidis.
Before exploring these sects it would be helpful to understand the uniquely Islamic
view of Shaitan (Satan) or Iblis as he is also known. The name Iblis is derived from the
Greek word diabolus. In Islamic mythology Iblis refnses to bow down before Adam
(h umani ty) as all Allah’s other angels had done when commanded to do so ( Qur’an 11:34).
It is for this transgression or rebellion that Shaitan is punished with rejection.
66
One Sufistic school, founded by Ibn Arabi has another interpretation of why Iblis
would not bow down. They say that Iblis represents the Imagination which would not
prostrate itself to the Intellect. “Imagination... both dissipates and concentrates the faculty
of remembrance and seduces both to 'sin and rebellion’ and to the vision of the divine-in-
things.”(20)
The term Sufi is used to describe a number of mystical sects within Islam. Sufism is an
Islamic synthesis of mystical teachings often influenced by Gnosticism, Neo-Platonism and
other religious sects. However, it contains many original features based on Islamic and
native Arabic or Persian ideas. Solid evidence for the Sufi movement dates from around
800 and continues as a viable part of Islamic culture today. It appears likely that these
tendencies in Islam are largely the result of original Persian or Iranian influence. One
tradition holds that its ultimate root is to be found with the personality of Salman al-Farisi,
Mohammed’s Persian barber who lived in the Prophet’s house. If there are left-hand path
characteristics to be found anywhere in the philosophically right-hand path tradition of
Islam, it should be in Sufism. Indeed there are important fleeting glimpses of sophisticated
left-hand path ideas in these sects.
To some Sufis Iblis is seen as a manifestation of Allah’s majesty. They say that he
refused to snbmit to the God’s command because he was totally focused on the Absolute
and would not dilute that focus by worshipping anything else.
Tdamic thought again brings up the topic of the dual heritage of the left-hand path— the
carnal and the intellectual. A mystical view is that Iblis is the carnal soul (nafs) :
“The carnal soul and Satan have been one from the first.
And both have envied and been an enemy of Adam ”(21)
Iblis is said to have a special kind of link to the Absolute. This is due to the idea that he
is the first model for the separate “I-consciousness” independent of the Absolute. So in a
way, Iblis disobeyed Allah for the sake of love and for the sake of his loyalty to his One
Beloved (the Absolute). He is cursed and punished for his disobedience— but even in this
he takes satisfaction at being separated out for unique treatment by the Absolute. The
parallel between this and the psycho-cosmology of the Gnostic magus is obvious.
One Sufi who was executed for his thoughts in 1131, Ayn al-Qozat Hamadani, spoke
of those who have a special affinity for Iblis as “the separated ones.” Those who thrive in a
state separate from Allah. Wilson writes:
Ayn al-Qozat implies that separation-in-love is in some sense superior to
union-in-love, because the former is a dynamic condition and the latter a static
one. Iblis is not only the paragon of separated ones, he also causes this
condition in human lovers— and although some experience this as “evil,” the
Sufi knows that it is necessary, and even good.(22)
Aleister Crowley, or his “Holy Guardian Angel,” will echo some of these sentiments in
The Book of the Law (1:29) wherein Nuit says: “For I am divided for love’s/ sake, for the
chance of union.”
Al-Qozat goes to develop the concept of Iblis as the guardian of an inner chamber of
divinity wherein there is a Black Light— a realm beyond all duality. It is “darkness, but it
is light just the same ”(23) Al-Qozat declares hear the word of God: ‘Praise be to God,
who has created the heavens and the earth and has established darkness and light’ ( Qur'an
VI: 1) How can black be complete without white or white without black be complete? It
cannot be so.” (24)
To some Sufis the figure of Iblis becomes a secret exemplary model. One rather
notorious group, the Malamatiya (from Ar. malama , blame) sect practiced antinomiamsm
reminiscent of the Ophite or Barbelo-Gnostic sects. Members of this sect believed that their
67
nearness to a divine state was proven by the level of contempt shown to them by normal
humanity. They totally neglected religious laws and regularly committed sinful acts.(25)
One of the earliest Sufi practitioners whose ideas bordered on the left-hand path was
Abu-Yazid of Persia (d. 875). He came to realize that God was the equivalent of his own
soul. He wrote: “Glory to Me! How great is my Majesty!” Technically he was committing
the intellectual sin of “incamationalism” (Ar. hulul) by claiming to be God (or a god)
incarnate. This seems to be a general tendency in Sufistic beliefs. Again we are reminded of
the Gnostic sects where a practitioner could exclaim after some stage: ‘T am Christ !”(26)
Al-Junaid (d. 910) developed the idea that man’s separate existence from God is a result
of God’s own will. However, God tries to “overcome” this separateness by pouring out
the fullness of his own Being. This Sufi used the imagery of erotic love to articulate his
theology of human separateness from God. The lover yearns for union but takes intense
joy in die suffering caused by the separation.(27)
The most radical of the early Sufis, and a student of al-Junaid, actually identified
himself as a god, or perhaps logos incarnate. This was Mansur al-Hallaj (d. 922) who
equated himself with die logos of Truth. He wrote in his Kitab al-Tawasin (51):(28)
If ye do not recognize God, at least recognize His signs. I am that sign, I am
the Creative Truth (ana l-haqq), because through the Truth I am a truth
eternally. My friends and teachers are Iblis and Pharaoh. Iblis was threatened
with Hell-fire, yet he did not recant Pharaoh was drowned in the sea, yet he
did not recant, for he would not acknowledge anything between him and
God. And I, though I am killed and crucified, and though my hands and feet
are cut off— I do not recant(29)
For writing these words al-Hallaj was condemned to die having committed the gross
blasphemy of equating himself with (a) god— and what was worse by using the model of
Jesus Christ for doing so. For this, his mode of execution was that of his hero—
crucifixion. Al-Hallaj is said to have reached a “Permanence of Self in the Real” (Ar. baqa ’)
by which he was able to ascend to Paradise after his martyrdom.(30)
The Assassins
and the Old Man of the Mountain
Another faction with left-hand path implications is the Ishmaili sect within Shi’a Islam
of Persia. The Ishmailis are also known to history as the Hashashin, or “Assassins.” This
sect has its origins in 1074 when the Persian Hasan-i Sabbah was initiated into Ishmailism
in Cairo. In 1094 he moved his headquarters to a mountain fortress in Persia called the
Alamut, or “Eagle’s Nest” This effected a division in the sect into two branches, the
oriental branch with its headquarters at Alamut in Persia and the occidentals in Egypt and
Yemen.(3l) It was the shaikh or “elder” of the fortress of Alamut — the so-called Old Man
of the Mountain — about whom Marco Polo reported in his book recounting his journey to
the east(32)
Hasan-i Sabbah developed and taught a system of spiritual hermeneutics called in
Arabic ta’wil: “to take something back to its source or deepest significance.” Tawil is used
to penetrate beyond the exoteric limitations of the Law ( shariah ) and Path (tariqah) of
religion to arrive at the esoteric Reality ( haqiqah ) behind the outer fonns.(Wilson 1988, p.
38) Hasan-i Sabbah declared: “Nothing is true, everything is permitted.” (A phrase that has
had immense literary and artistic impact today tbrongh William Burroughs and the modem
movement called “Discordianism.”
In 1162 Hasan II (son of Hasan-i Sabbah) became the shaikh of Alamnt. On 17
Ramazan (8 August) 1164 he declared the Qiyamat — the Great Resurrection. In doing this
he declared: ‘The chains of the Law are broken!” The inhabitants of the Eagle’s Nest were
free of obligations of Is lami c religious laws and a perpetual holiday was declared. Hasan II
68
can be said to have realized the ‘lmmam-of-his-own-being” and he then invited all his
followers to participate in this.(33) With the Qiyamat Hasan II maintained that the
resurrection of the dead in physical bodies was possible in life. The Ishmaili initiate ‘“dies
before death’ when he comes to realize the separative and alienated aspects of the self, the
ego-as-programmed-illusion. He is ‘reborn’ in consciousness but he is reborn in the body,
as an individual, the *soul-at-peace.”’(34) In 1166 Hasan II was murdered.
It seems likely that Hasan n took his followers too far too fast He had perhaps reached
the spiritual “station” called Permanence (Ar. baqa’f but his doctrine of Qiyamat had been
developed over several years through the gradual stages of Ishmaili initiation and based on
the practice of tawil. But the stage that immediately precedes Permanence is said to be
Annihilation (Ar. fana').( 35) This annihilation is not an end in itself, which may be true in
the right-hand path, but is a phase to be passed through before individual permanence is
possible. Hasan II tried to offer this intoxicated state of permanence to his followers in a
direct and simple form, which they did not seem ready to accept or be able to achieve.
From the left-hand path perspective, he attempted to transform a school of the intellectual,
gradual Transcendental Path, into one of the sensory, immediate Lesser Path over night.
Ultimately it did not work for all of the followers.
The Ishmailis came to believe that their leader or Imam was divine, and following
1164, the time of Qiyamat , many of them maintained the possibility of a “pure spiritual
Islam, freed of any legalistic spirit, of all servitude to the Law.”(36) Far from submitting to
“God’s will,” in the final state of Ishmaili initiation (the LX 0 ) “every vestige of dogmatic
religion has been practically cast aside, and the initiate is become a philosopher pure and
simple, free to adopt such system or admixture as may be most to his taste ”(37)
In 1251 the fortress At Alamut was captured and destroyed by the Mongols, and the
vast library there was burned. Afterward the Ishmailis found refuge in various Sufi
sects.(38) In the 19th century the Ishmailis re-emerged under the spiritual leadership of the
Aga Khans, and are today a wealthy sect headquartered in India.(39)
The Yezidi Devil Worshippers
To call the Yezidis an Islamic sect may or may not be correct But it is perhaps within
the cultural milieu of Islam that it makes most sense to discuss them. Also to call them
“devil worshippers” — which has so often been done(40) — may or may not be correct.
But certainly they have been called this so much that a discussion of their beliefs in the left-
hand path context can not go unrecorded
The Yezidis are a Kurdish people. Kurdish is a dialect of the Iranian branch of the
Indo-European family of languages. Thus they are not part of the general Arabic population
surrounding them in their homeland in and around the valley of Lalish near the sources of
the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in the northern part of modem Iraq. Evidence for the Yezidi
religion dates only from the 14th century. Its peculiar lore may be the result of ancient pre-
Islamic tenets being grafted into Islamic religious terminology, or it may constitute an
original creation.
Historically the Yezidis trace the origin of their faith back to shaikh Adi ibn Musafir
who came to the valley of Lalish from the valley of Baalbek in Lebanon by way of
Baghdad. He was in Baghdad around 1100 where he was associated with various Sufis,
including Ayn al-Qozat Hamadani. Among the Kurds of Lalish he founded an order which
was outwardly orthodox, but which secretly venerated Melek Taus— the Iblis of al-Hallaj.
The word Yezidi is probably derived from the Persian word yaz(a)d-, “supreme being”
which is part of the Zoroastrian terminology. The term was used by the Shi’ite Muslims of
Persia as a term of insult— essentially meaning to them “heathen” or “infidel.”(4l)
In Yezidi doctrine the First Cause, or God ( Khuda ) created the cosmos through the
agency of seven angels. The first among these, Azaziel or Asa’el, refused to bow down
before Adam (man) who had been created directly by Khuda alone. One of the reasons for
his refusal, by the way may be that Azaziel was formed of fire, while Adam was formed
69
from clay, and the angel refused to bow to a lower being.(42) However, Khuda has
subsequently forgiven Azaziel— who is therefore not the spirit of evil the uninitiated make
him out to be. The Yezidis consider the name Shaitan (Satan) as an insult to Azaziel and
refuse to use the term— and if it is used by others in their presence retribntion is
demanded.
The name Azaziel is also rarely heard among them. It has been largely replaced by a
cognomen: Melek Taus— the Peacock Angel. The Yezidis trust in Melek Taus and ask for
his special knowledge and protection. They believe that Judgment Day is in the remote
future and that the faithful live on through cycles of reincarnation (a belief also shared with
the Ishmailis and Druzes). To the Yezidis evil is a fact of natural life and not the work of a
supernatural being. Melek Taus’ role in the “fall” of man is not that of a tempter— but he is
revered as the brave provider of knowledge needed by mankind to survive.
One of the Yezidi holy books called the Kitab el-Aswad is Arabic or the Mas’hafRish
in Kurdish (both meaning “Black Book”) tells that God created Adam ( only the male) and
placed him in Paradise but forbids him to eat of wheat. After a hundred years Melek Taus
asks God why Adam has not increased or multiplied. God replied by giving to the Peacock
Angel administrative authority in the world. Melek Taus then instructs Adam to go against
God’s prohibition and eat of the grain. The Peacock Angel then drives Adam out of
paradise. Only later was woman created (from under Adam’s left armpit), and mankind is
able to increase.(43) Here the positive evolutionary role of Melek Taus is clear.
How this positive evolutionary role is reflected in the spiritual lives of individuals is
demonstrated by the words of a poem by shaikh Adi himself:
I am Adi of Shams, son of Musafir.
In the secret of my knowledge there is no god but me...
Praise be to myself, and all things are of my will.
And the universe is lighted by some of my gifts.
With the Yezidis and Ishmailis, as with so many of the other apparently left-hand path
traditions, the essentially left-handed goal — imm ortal independent existence of the self in a
quasi-divine state — is not clear except at the highest levels of initiation or at the leadership
level. It is probably for this reason that the leaders and past leaders of the sects seem to be
‘‘worshipped.” Actually they serve as pioneering spirits who have walked the path before
the aspirant and thus serve as exemplary models. It is interesting to note that one of the
shrines, or actual images of the Peacock Angel ( sanjak ), in the Yezidi region is said to be
dedicated to Mansur al-Hallaj— the Persian Sufi and apparent practitioner of the left-hand
path executed in 922.(44)
It seems that the Yezidi tradition is the result of a syncretism of indigenous Kurdish
beliefs (probably non-Zoroastrian Iranian sects) v Iranian dualism, shaikh Adi’s Sufistic
teachings, Al-Hallaj’s interpretation of Iblis, and perhaps Nestorian Christianity.(45) This
synthesis may, however, only be a superficial one and perhaps the values and structures
underlying Yezidi belief remain essentially ancient Kurdish ways. Hus is even alluded to in
another of the Yezidi holy books, the Kitab al-Jilwa (TV): “The scriptures of strangers are
accepted by me (Melek Taus) in so far as they accord with my ordinances and run not
counter to diem ..,”(46)
It is curious to note that virtually all of the left-hand path traits present in the Islamic
cultural stream seem to flow ultimately from the Iranian world— whether it is the heretical
Sufis, the Ishmailis, or even the Kurdish Yezidis. I would speculate that the reason for this
is that the left-hand path ideas were common— even if eternally controversial — in the
pre-Islamic world and that these yearnings of the human spirit to attain to an independent,
immortal and awakened state could not be stamped out entirely— even by the vigorously
right-hand path tradition of the way of“submission.”
70
Notes for Chapter 4
(1) Tacitus, The Histories . trans, K. Wellesley. (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1975), p. 274.
(2) Kurt Rudolf, Gnosis: The Nature and History of Gnosticism (San Francisco: Harper and Row,
1987), pp. 275-366 and Benjamin Walker, Gnosticism (Wellingborough, UK: Aquarian Press, 1982), pp.
133-iaO,
(3) See Hans Jonas, The Gnostic Religion (Boston: Beacon, 1963, 2nd ed.), pp. 103-111; Rudolf,
Gnosis, pp. 294-298 and Walker, Gnosticism, pp. 136-139.
(4) See James M Robinson, ed.. The Nag Hammadi Library (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1981),
pp. 362-367.
(5) Jonas, Gnostic Religion , p. Ill)
(6) Walker, Gnosticism, p, 138.
(7) Walker, Gnosticism , p. 138-142 and Rudolf, Gnosis, pp. 298; 309 ff.
(8) Jonas, Gnostic Religion, p. 105.
(9) Jonas, Gnostic Religion, p. 110.
(10) On the development of St Augustine’s thought see Mircea Eliade History of Religious Ideas
(Chicagor: University of Chicago Press, 1985), vol EL, pp. 38-50.
(11) On the concept of “binaric” see Anton LaVey, “Binaric, or Don’t Try to Teach a Pig to Sing — It
Wastes Your Time and Annoys the Pig,” Cloven Hoof (121) XX:3 (1987), 1-2.
(12) Morton Smith, Jesus the Magician (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1978), pp. 45-67.
(13) Smith, Jesus, p. 62)
(14) The wiagifMi texts of the papyri have been translated by Hans Dieter Betz, ed. The Greek Magical:
Including the Demotic Spells (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986), vol I, and the orignal Greek
(with a German translation) is presented by Karl Preisendanz, ed.. Papyri Graecae Magicae: Die
griechischen Zauberpapyri (Stuttgart: Teubner), 1973-74,2 vols., 2nd ed.
(15) Betz, Papyri, pp. 4-5.
(16) Betz, Papyri, pp. 41-42.
(17) Smith, Jesus , pp. 125-126.
(18) Smith, Jesus, p. 9.
(19) Eliade, History, vol. El, pp. 116-151.
(20) Peter Lambom Wilson, “Iblis, the Black Light” Gnosis 14 (Winter 1990), p. 46.
(21) Javad, Nurbakhsb, The Great Satan “ Eblis London: (Khaniqahi-NimatuBabi Publications, 1986),
p. 67.
(22) Wilson, “Iblis,” p. 45.
(23) Wilson, “Iblis,” p. 45.
(24) Wilson, “Iblis” p. 45.
(25) A. J. Arberry, Sufism: An Account of the Mystics of Islam (New Yoric Harper and Row, 1950),
p* 70)
(26) Walks:, Gnosticism, p. 128.
(27) Arberry, Sufism, p. 58.
(28) Arberry, Sufism, p. 60,
(29) Arberry, Sufism, p. 60.
(30) Peter Lambom Wilson, Scandal: Essays m Islamic Heresy (New Yoric Autooomedia, 1988), p. 9.
(31) Eliade History, vol. m, pp. 119-120.
(32) Marco Polo, The Travels, (London: Penguin, 1958),
pp. 70-73.
(33) Wilson Scandal, p. 38.
(34) Wilson Scandal , p. 40.
(35) Wilson Scandal, p. 45.
(36) Eliade History, vol. EL, p. 120.
(37) Edward Bunnan, The Assassins: Holy Killers of Islam (Wellingborough, UK: Crucible, 1987), p.
61.
(38) Eliade History, vol. E3, p. 120.
71
(39) Bunnan, The Assassins, p. 174ff.
(40) For example by Arkon Daraul, A History of Secret Societies (Secaucus, NJ: Citadel, 1961), pp.
141-155 and Anton LaVey, The Satanic Rituals (New York: Avon, 1972), pp. 151-172.
(41) John S. Guest, The Yezidis: A Study in Survival (London: KPI, 1987), p. 31.
(42) Wilson, “Iblis ” p. 43.
(43) See the Black Book, translated by Guest, Yezidis, p. 203.
(44) Guest, Yezidis, pp. 40-41 and Wilson, “Iblis,” p. 45.
(45) Walker, Gnosticism, pp. 74-75.
(46) Guest, Yezidis, p. 201-202.
72
Chapter 5
The Path of Satan
The Left-Hand Path in the Western Middle Ages
500-1500
In any given culture, the beginning of the medieval period may be marked from the time
it officially accepts (by whatever means) the nominal authority of the Christian church. By
the time of the advent of the Middle Ages in western Europe the basic church dogmas
outlined by Sl Augustine had become the standard of orthodoxy. However, the swarm of
heterodox teachings, and even organized sects, remained unceasing until the present day.
The orthodox call heterodox doctrines “heresies”— and as often as not equate them with
the work of the Devil At the same time the “heretics” almost without exception conceive of
themselves as true Christians who champion the true teachings of Jesus against the
orthodox forces— which are sometimes themselves characterized as being diabolicaL For
the most part, with some rare exceptions, the story of medieval spiritual dissent and
warfare is one internal to the right-hand path.
Augustine’s dogmas of the Trinity, Original Sin, Free-Will and Grace became litmns
tests for other doctrines. The seeds of many heterodox movements were planted early.
Arius (256-336), a priest in Alexandria, Egypt, taught that Jesus Christ was not god
himself but a man who had become god-like. This teaching was conde mne d as heretical
because it denied the dogma of the Trinity— that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are/Ls co-
etemal and co-equal. This Christological controversy perhaps ultimately stems from two
Greek words used to describe Christ theotetos, having the substance of god, and
theomorphos , being akin to god. In actuality, Arius was trying to preserve the purity and
simplicity of monotheism in his teaching. The orthodox elevation of Jesus to the level of
God the Father did two things. It created a kind of duotheism (or tritheism) and it made
Jesus ever more remote from humanity. As this happened it became increasingly difficult
for the Christian believer to see him as an exemplary model for his own salvation, and at
the same time it increased the power and necessity of the institutionalized Church in the
spiritual life of the individual. In the Middle Ages things as apparently irrelevant to modem
minds as Christology had a direct effect on the social, political, economic and, obviously,
spiritual life of each individual.
Another important heretical thinker was Pelagius (died around 420) who taught that
every human was bom free of original sin and that all individuals were responsible for their
own moral actions. Pelagius was of Celtic heritage (either Irish or Britonic) and was most
interested in the improvement of the moral practice of Christianity. Even in this early period
Christian moral practice was lax because there were always ways to shirk moral
responsibility. Augustine taught that moral behavior was a sign of God’s grace, while it
might be held that immoral behavior was somehow “caused” by the Devil— in either
instance the individual is not responsible. Pelagius was condemned by the church and died
in an unknown place in the Middle East
73
Certainly neither Arius or Pelagius could be called practitioners of the left-hand path.
However, the main points of their teachings— the heroic view of Christ as an exemplary
mythic model for self-development, the basic freedom of human beings and their
responsibility for their own actions — are elements of any coherent left-hand path
philosophy.
The strongest exponents of this early form of Christian heresy were the various East
Germanic tribes (Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Vandals, etc.) who converted to this Arian form of
the faith. It is probably also true that their Gothic Christianity was not unmixed with
elements of their native Germanic religion.(l) Nevertheless this form of Christianity —
linked as it was with the Goths — was annihilated in a series of wars waged on the Goths
by the Pope and various secular kings in the 6th through 8th centuries.
Gnosticism was the root of the most powerful challenge to orthodoxy in the later
Middle Ages. This branch of Gnosticism, however, had its direct root in the doctrines of
Mani (216-277) a Persian holy man who was raised in the Judeo-Christian sect of the
Elchasaites. In 240 he broke with the sect and founded his own movement as a result of
messages he received from the “King of die Paradise of Light.’" Manicheanism is a
synthesis of Iranian Gnostic thought with Judeo-Christian mythology and certain Buddhist
teachings.
Mani taught that there are two principles — light and darkness, and three great epoches
of cosmic history: a time when light was separate from darkness, this time in which the
darkness attacks the light, and a coming time in which the darkness will again be separated
from the light. A person can be saved from the world of darkness — or flesh — only
through knowledge (gnosis) of this reality.(2)
From thess Persian, Manichean, origins sprang many heretical sects in western Europe.
Some of these were highly ascetic — such as the Cathars, while others went in the libertine
direction — such as the Brethren of the Free Spirit Indeed these are the same tendencies
present in all Gnostic movements.
The church fought dissenters and protesters throughout the Middle Ages. Virtually all
of those it oppressed, however, were also (and usually more aware) followers of the right-
hand path. After the success of one of these group’s movements — the Protestant
Reformation begun by the German priest Martin Luther — interest in the possibilities of
secret underground diabolical movements increased. This was true both in the Protestant
north as well as the Catholic south.
In the first half of the Middle Ages — until about 1200 — the religious intolerance of
the church was largely reserved for pagans (peoples adhering to their national native
traditions) and national Christian religions (such as Gothic Arianism). These were usually
opposed in open warfare in an alliance between the Pope and relevant secular authorities—
this most often being the French king or the Holy Roman Emperor.
A foretaste of what was to come occurred in 385 when Pricillian was executed in Trier
for holding heretical beliefs. But the institutionalized persecution of heretics, witches,
magicians and the like did not begin in emest until around 1200. By this time all overt
paganism in Europe had been stamped out— so the forces of intolerance and spiritual
totalita rianis m turned inward to begin the persecution of those who professed to be
Christians but who did not meet orthodox standards of belief.
Pope Innocent 133 in a bull of 1199 formally established the church-wide institution of
the Inquisition. By 1273 Pope Gregory IX appointed the Dominican Order as the official
Inquisitorial body. This was later modified to include the Franciscans.
The level of institutionalized violence and hatred embodied in the Inquisition has rarely
been equalled in the course of human history. Its record is too well known, and too vile, to
repeat here in any detail.(3) Our purpose in this book is not to recount the history of evil —
for if such were the case surely the history of the left-hand path would make a poorer
subject than the history of the forces of institutionalized orthodoxy— Christian, Muslim,
Communist, or National Socialist. But to appreciate the level of resistance faced by spiritual
74
dissenters of all sorts— including practitioners of the left-hand path — the nature of the
forces bent on their destruction is important to remember.
It is also noteworthy that the Inquisition of the Roman Catholic Church was (or is for
the institution still exists under the name “Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith”) not
the only body in Christendom which engaged in these intolerant and spiritually totalitarian
practices. “Freelancing” Protestant witch-hunters or witch-finders along with local
Protestant clergy and secular authorities persecuted those thought to be in league with the
Devil no less vigorously than the Catholics had done.
Although heretics of all kinds were considered to be at least indirectly in league with the
Devil, it was not until the 16th and 17th centuries that widespread “satanism” or
“witchcraft” was suggested by the forces of orthodoxy (Protestant or Catholic). Not
surprisingly this is a time when we also find little in the way of true left-hand path practice.
The whole “witchcraft scare” of the 1500-1600s seems to have been for the most part a
malicious (and profitable) fantasy on the part of churchmen. In a brilliant study, Norman
Cohn(4) has shown how later Christians used earlier Roman descriptions of what they
thought occurred at Christian agape feasts and modified the descriptions over time to suit
any heretical group churchmen wished to slander.
Two examples of the process should be sufficient to illustrate the point Concerning
what Romans think Christians do in their services, Minucius Felix (active at the end of the
2nd century CE) wrote:
A child... is set before the would-be novice. The novice stabs the child to
death... Then ... they hungrily drink the child’s blood, and compete with one
another as they divide his limbs. Through this victim they are bound together;
and the fact that they all share this knowledge of the crime pledges them all to
silence.
On the feast-day they foregather with all their children, sisters, mothers,
people of either sex and all ages. When the company is all aglow from
feasting, and impure lust has been set afire by drunkenness,... they twine the
bonds of unnameable passion as chance decides. And so all alike are
incestuous, if not always in deed at least by complicity... Precisely the
secrecy of this evil religion proves that all these things, or practically all, are
true.(5)
Some eight centuries later, around 1050, a Greek philosopher Michael Psellos, wrote a
dialog On the Operation of Demons containing what the orthodox Christians thought of the
rites of the Bogomil heretics:
They bring ... young girls whom they have initiated into their rites ... and
threw themselves lasciviously on the girls; each one on whomever first falls
into his hands, no matter whether she be his sister, his daughter or his mother
... When this rite has been completed, each goes home; and after waiting nine
months until the time has come for the unnatural children of such unnatural
seed to be bom, they come together... on the third day after the birth, they
tear the miserable babies from their mother’s arms. They cut their tender flesh
all over with sharp knives and catch the stream of blood in basins. They
throw the babies, still breathing and gasping, into the fire to be burned to
ashes. After which they mix the ashes with die blood in the basins to make an
abominable drink... (6)
Let it suffice to say that the latter description is no more likely to be true than the
former. What is remarkable is that such descriptions could still be heard on television
“news” programs in the 1980s and 1990s— including stories about “breeders” and infants
75
being burned and devoured (so there was no “evidence” for the crime). See Appendix A on
the “Urban Legend of Satanicism ”
It is certain that we would learn little concerning any genuine left-hand path schools,
traditions or philosophies by relying on medieval Christian descriptions of the activities of
their adversaries— real or imagined. However, the symbols engendered during this period
would serve to stir the rebellious imaginations of antinomian Romantics in the late 18th to
20th century.
The Christian Heretics
The Dualists
Even when we look to those who spiritually rebelled against the authority of the church
during the Middle Ages we find mostly only other right-hand path practitioners.
The great dualistic heresies — which have been referred to as being “Satanic* 7 by
orthodox theologians — had few left-hand path tendencies. As can be seen from the
“learned** description of their activities reported by Psellos, the orthodox believers really
had no idea what the Bogomils or Cathars believed— and they were not interested in
knowing. The orthodox wanted only their extermination. This extermination could only be
completed by means of open warfare on the sects involved. This was the so-called
Albegensian Crusade (1207-1221). Even after that it took until about 1330 to wipe out the
last vestige of the Cathar movement in Europe.
What did these “Vile heretics** teach?
Derived ultimately from the Manichean tradition (probably in the “Paulician” or
“Messalian” forms in Asia Minor, Bogomilism was founded around 950 by a village priest
in Bulgaria c allin g himself Bogomil , “Beloved of God”
Bogomil preached that God — Bog — had two sons: Satanel and Christ Satanel
rebelled in heaven and caused one third of all the angels to follow him. As a result of the
rebellion Satanel created the material universe— of which he is god. Bogomil equated, as
do most Gnostics, the Jewish God of the Old Testament with Satanel.
As a result, Bogomil believed all flesh, and material things of all sorts, to be evil tricks
of Satanel The orthodox priesthood and its sacraments and miracles — all works through
matter— were thus held to be manifestations of evil
The ultimate aim of the Bogomil believer was to unite with Christ— the good god. To
do this he or she must lead an ascetic lifestyle, be vegetarian, not indulge in wine, sex,
marriage or procreation. It is interesting to note that die English term bugger, meaning
“Sodomy, anal or oral intercourse*’ is derived from Bulgams, Bulgar. This is because the
Bogomil heresy, with its prohabition against procreation, was so widespread among these
people in the Middle Ages they became identified with such practices!
Most of the propaganda written ag ains t them, a sample of which appears above) is
useless as evidence for what they really believed because it seems to be merely repetitions
of charges made indiscriminately against any and all whom the church wished to slander
and destroy.
The Bogomils were the object of frequent persecutions by the orthodox authorities.
This in part caused them to send missions north of the Balkans and the west into Italy,
France and western Germany, where they developed into various movements, e.g. the
Cathars or Albegensians and Waldensians.(7) By the beginning of the 14th century the
Bogomils were effectively suppressed as an open religion, and with the Ottoman conquest
of the B alkans in the late 14th century the religion disappeared. Most Bogomils eventually
converted to Islam.(8)
The Cathars had a theology and cosmology almost identical to that of the Bogomils.
However, they were much more successful in organizing themselves, especially in
southern France or Provence.
Probably the chief reason for Cathar popularity in Europe was the widespread and
thorough corruption of the Roman Catholic institutious. Catholic priests lived in carnal
luxury. Many were married or simply lived together with concubines, they ran taverns and
76
charged extra fees for all their religious services. This latter practice was necessitated by the
need of priests to pay off their patrons within the church who arranged for their
appointments to office. The Cathars, on the other hand, seem to have been devoutly and
radically spiritual in all that they did.
Cathar internal structure was simple. After a long apprenticeship an adept entered the
sect by means of a rite called the convenza. The second and last level of initiation was
celebrated in a rite called the consolamentum after which the initiate is called a “Perfect”
These were the true Cathari — “Purified Ones.” (Catharus comes from the Greek katharos ,
pure.)
After one had become a Perfect it was expected that one would sin no more. Although
the Cathars were lenient on the laity— their standards of morality at the ‘Perfect” level were
so harsh that many practiced the endura — allowing themselves to starve to death — after
the consolamentum rite. This was done in order that they might ascend into the realm of
light without sin. For the Cathars there was no Hell below this world— this world of flesh
and matter was the prison of the spirit and the true Inferno. Their ideal was to set into
motion a process which would end the existence of humanity in this world, propelling it
into a realm of pure spirit
Although Manicheans, Bogomils and Cathars would often be referred to as “Satanic”
by orthodox propagandists it can be seen that they have virtually nothing to do with the left-
hand path. From the Cathar point of view the Roman Catholic Church was in reality
Satanic. This is the common charge / counter-charge tactic typical of the right-hand path. In
the case of the Roman Church it might, however, seem plausible when one reads a study
such as The Bad Popes by E. R. Chamberlin.
The strict moral dualism of the Mamchean kind — or even the implicit and elusive
dualism of the orthodox variety — is simply not conducive to a true left-hand path
philosophy. Such dualism that does exist as a part of the analysis of the cosmic or human
order must be accepted and utilized for the evolution of the self into an ever more perfected
and god-like being to be true to left-hand path premises.
Pantheistic Free Spirits
Another kind of Christian heresy especially popular in Germany, northern France, the
Low Countries and England was the so-called Brethren of the Free Spirit This movement
was present throughout these regions from about the beginning of the 1200s all the way to
the end of the 1600s. One of the reasons the movement as a whole could continue beyond
the grasp of the Inquisition is that it had no formal structure and the members tended to be
both highly intelligent and mobile. Many, however, were burned at the stake for their
beliefs. “Spiritual Libertinism” was equally widespread among women and men. The sect
often flourished within the social context of the wider communities known as the Beghards
(men) and Beguines (women).
Their traditions tended to be oral and hence original texts are scarce. Three of the most
important original sources for Free Spirit thought are Schwester Katrei, Marguerite
Porete’s Mirror of Simple-Souls, and a tract by an English “Ranter” (a Free Spirit off¬
shoot) called A Single Eye.{ 9)
The Brethren of the Free Spirit may indeed be said to belong to the more libertine
branch of “Gnostic” thought— just as the Cathars represented an extreme form of the
ascetic branch. However, extreme dualism is not a feature of their thought. It is more in
keeping with the known facts to call the Free Spirit movement “pantheistic.”
On the surface the Spiritual Libertines, as they are also called, would seem to be prime
examples of left-hand path thought and practice and be in many ways similar to the left-
hand path antinomian tan tries of the east Norman Cohn says they represent “a system of
self-exaltation often amounting to self-deification.” If we delve beyond the surface we can
see some distinctions that bear emphasis.
77
The overriding cosmological feature of Free Spirit belief is the realization that “God is
all that is” and that “every created thing is divine.”(10) These formulas, as well as the
essence of their practice point to a Neo-Platonic model of reality as the root of their beliefs.
Cohn, however, points out that their teachings seem to stem from the writings of Pseudo-
Dionysius and John the Scot Erigena— and to have taken no further attempts to
homogenize Neo-Platonism into the Christian mainstream of orthodoxy.(ll)
Another important influence on their understanding of the world seems to have been
supplied — if indirectly — by the visionary Joachim of Fiore (1145-1202).(12) Joachim
divided the history of the world into three phases or stages: that of the Father (or Law), of
the Son (or Gospel) and of the Holy Spirit The advent of the Age of the Holy Spirit would
usher in a transformation of the world. The first Age was one of fear and servitude, the
second of faith and filial submission— but the third Age “would be one of love, joy and
freedom, when knowledge of God would be revealed directly in the hearts of all men.”(13)
The Brethren of the Free Spirit had a similar doctrine in which they held that the Incarnation
of the Son (Christ) was being surpassed by the Incarnation of the Holy Spirit in the bodies
of the “Spirituals”— the highest initiates of the Free Spirit movement. They could at that
point declare: “I am the Holy Spirit!”(14)
The pantheism of the Spiritual Libertines comes to the forefront when we observe their
attitudes toward the self of humanity. Cohn concluded that the core of the Free Spirit
system hinged on an attitude toward the self. The Spiritual Libertine believed he had
attained perfection and so was incapable of sin. This awareness inevitably led to certain
antinomian practices. It became a virtual requirement for the initiate to engage in forbidden
acts.(15) In a world in which sexual pleasure was perhaps the greatest of forbidden
pleasures, it was only natural for the practices of the Spiritual Libertines to gravitate in this
direction. There is evidence for a tradition of “free love” among them— but little to none of
public orgies (often ascribed to them by their orthodox enemies).
Those who had realized their unity with the divine considered themselves to have
returned to the Adamite state of being— free of sin and unashamed. The Free Spirits seem
to have practiced ritual nudity as an expression of this realization.
But how did the Spiritual Libertines at tain to this Adamite state of sinless innocence and
imm ortality? Unfortunately most of the texts that might have been used by the sect were
destroyed by the Inquisition, in the fragments of the system which remain, however, a few
things are clear.
The first phase of initiation — which may go on for years — involves self-abnegation
and self-torture. There is the cultivation of absolute passivity and obedience (sometimes to
a “master”). During this phase one is not a true Spiritual Libertine, but the as an apprentice
one is being trained to receive the Incarnation of the Holy Spirit The second phase is the
actual transformation into God. At that point one becomes Adamite (or Evite), restored to
the original state of being.
The Mirror of Simple Souls describes a more detailed process of seven steps of
initiation. The first three involve ascetic practices of self-denial and obedience. Levels four
and five prepare the way for the state of exultation— one is blinded by the light of love,
preparing the way for the recognition of one’s own sinfulness at the fifth level. This
experience of the immense gulf between the self and God allows the light and love of God
to sweep into the self. The will of God becomes the will of the self. At the sixth level one
becomes a true Free Spirit— the soul is annihilated in the Deity so that there is nothing but
God: God - Self. In the seventh and last level the self rejoices permanently in the divine
state of being.(16)
The Spiritual Libertine is not just united with God— but becomes identical to God.
This identity is furthermore permanent Because of the evolutionary quality of Free Spirit
theology, that is that this phenomenon represents a new stage in the development of deily
and humanity. The Free Spirit initiate could claim to be superior to God as understood in
texts from previous Ages. (17)
78
As with many Gnostic sects, the Brethren of the Free Spirit considered this world to be
the realm of Hell and punishment. But it was not because it was made of matter, rather it
was because of the existence of the gulf between man and God and the presence of man’s
feelings of guilt and conscience which torment him due to his ignorance of reality. By
attaining identity with God, the Free Spirit is liberated from these pangs of conscience—
which is tantamount to the liberation from the torments of HelL(18)
The praxis or spiritual technology of the Free Spirits, like those of so many sects -
especially those of the left-hand path — can be dangerous if misunderstood. Spiritual
Liberation is not in fact something that just suddenly decides is true and acts upon. It could
then be nothing but an excuse for vile or criminal acts. (There is no record of such acts
committed by true Free Spirits.) An actual process of self-transformation must be
undertaken. This process will invariably involve a long period of discipline and self-denial,
of spiritual and physical austerities. ,
A great deal of the Free Spirit sect’s beliefs and practices certainly accord with the
general characteristics of the left-hand path. They seem to deify the self, which is dynamic
and evolutionary, and direct these efforts toward an immortal existence. Socially they are
antinomian, but not particularly so when it comes to religious symbolism. They do not, for
example, worship a Devil. There is, however, an important and subtle difference between
this and the other schools of the left-hand path. Left-hand philosophies emphasize the
individual development and immortality. The emphasis is on the deification of the unique
and separate self— each individual is “raised” to the level of deity (either in this life-tnne or
in some post mortem state). With the Free Spirits the emphasis is quite different The Holy
Spirit descends and incarnates in individual humans filling them individually and
collectively with the undifferentiated substance of the Holy Spirit Although the
individuality appears to be preserved, this is only an illusion viewed from the outside. In
reality the individual soul has been annihilated and the self identified with the Holy Spirit tn
toto. This is similar to the more orthodox views of the state of jivanmukn (individual
liberation) in Hinduism. For this reason the Spiritual Libertines must ultimate ly be excluded
from being called practitioners of the left-hand path.
Before leaving this topic I would like to mention that many of the ideas underlying the
Free Spirit movement were embodied in — and in turn influenced by — the contemporary
German mystical theologians Meister Eckhart, Heinrich Suso and Johannes Tanler.(19)
The thought and writings of these and many of the other heretics of the medieval period
often find much more sympathetic readings today than the orthodox dogmas of that time or
this. The reasons for this will become apparent later.
The Witch Craze
Anton LaVey’s Ninth Satanic Statement reads: “Satan is the best friend the church has
ever had, as he has kept them in business all these year$!”(20) This formula is true on
many levels. It could be made both with regard to the definitions of the actual Sa t a n (i.e.
the carnal or of the principle of isolate intelligence) or with regard to the fictional character
of Satan hatched in the lurid imaginations of repressed churchmen, freelance witch-hunters
and hysterical members of the peasantry and middle class.
Once t he great organized heretical movements were thought to be demolished, or under
control, more widespread and deep-level spiritual dissent began to take root. This would
bear fruit in the form of the Protestant Reformation. Heretics, whether Gnostic dualists or
pantheistic Free Spirits, were always portrayed by churchmen as “Satanic”— which simply
meant they opposed the official orthodox and exclusively valid “party line” of the church
dogmas. By the 16th and 17th centuries there were no great heretical movements or pagan
nations to conquer— so the churches turned downward to the grass roots of society to find
its victims of “evangelism.” . ,
It is well known and well documented that the early church “chabolized the native gods
and goddesses of local populations as they converted them to Christianity. Given the
79
monotheistic theoretical basis of the faith this was not an altogether illegitimate attitude. The
pagan deities could not be wiped away overnight— and in fact were never fully eradicated
by the church. The lore, myths, rituals and beliefs of Christianity actually had to
accommodate themselves in many instances to pagan practices. Striking examples of this
are found in everything from the adoptions of the pagan calendar of festivals to popular
things such as the Christmas tree, Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Indeed, pagan forms
and practices survived in syncretization with Christian customs both positive and negative.
The old ways were canonized or sanctified in some aspects and diabolized in others.
The Indiculus superstitionum et paganiarum (Index of superstitions and pagaa
practices) is a remarkable document from early medieval Germany (around 740). The list
must represent things that were still occurring in central Europe at the time the Index was
published. The list reads:
1. On the sacrilege at graves and of the dead.
2. On the sacrilege among the buried dead.
3. On the purification festivals in February.
4. On the little houses, i.e. enclosures for the gods.
5. On sacrileges performed in churches.
6. On holy places in the woods, which are called Nimidas.
( Nemeton = Celtic word for sacred enclosure)
7. On the practices which they carry out on top of rocks.
8. On services to Mercury (= Odin) and Jupiter (= Thor)
9. On sacrifices, which are given to a saint.
10. On amulets and magical bands.
11. On sacrifices at wells.
12. On magical incantations.
13 On auguries by means of birds or horses or from the manure of oxen or
from their kidneys.
14. On divination or sortilage.
15. On fire produced by friction from wood, i.e. the Need-fire.
16. On the brains of animals.
17. On the heathen observations of the hearth-fire, or the ignition of these
things.
18. On uncertain places, which they hold sacred.
19. On the bundle of straw, which the common folk call Sl Mary.
20. On the festivals, which they give to Jupiter (= Thor) or Mercury (= Odin)
21. On the waning of the moon, which they call Vince Luna .
22. On tempests and horns and spoons.
23. On the furrows around the yards.
24. On the heathen meeting called Irias with tom clothes and shoes.
25. On the belief that they consider every dead person a saint
26. On idols made from dough.
27. On idols made from cloth.
28. On idols which they carry across fields.
29. On wooden feet or hands according to heathen practice.
30. On the opinion that the hearts of people can be taken away according to
the heathens, as women conjure the moon.
This primary evidence show the nature and scope of continuing heathen practice. We
can see that none of it is particularly “diabolical” in character— at least not by modem
standards.
The shift from heresy to “witchcraft” as a basis for religious persecution was facilitated
most of all by the publication of the Malleus Malificarum (Hammer of the Witches) in
1486.(21) It became the “witch-hunters’ manual” and was reprinted in 14 editions by
80
1520.(22) From this time to around 1700 was the period of the so-called “witch-craze.”
Persecutions of people suspected of witchcraft and witch-trials were sporadic throughout
Europe during this time. It would die down in one place only to flare up again elsewhere.
Even the British colonies were not immune. From the 1640s to the 1690s witches were
hung in the colonies of Connecticut, Rhode Island and Massachusetts.(23)
The Malleus Malificantm appears to be largely a work of learned fiction— but a deadly
fantasy it is. In it we are told that witches will do four things: renounce the Catholic faith,
devote themselves body and soul to evil, offer unbaptized children to the Devil, and engage
in sexual orgies. Of course, these were the same literary fictions invented by the Romans
and repeated by early churchmen almost 1500 years before the publication of this witch-
hunters' manual.
Now the fact that the witch cult did not exist in reality was far from a hindrance to the
witch-hunters. Since there were no obvious suspects— anyone and everyone could be
made suspect This significantly broadened the social scope of the persecutions. Since
“evidence” was almost always obtained under torture the witch-finders could suggest just
about any wild fantasy and have it affirmed by the delirious object of his cruel occupation.
The Protestant Reformation might have held out a more rational alternative to the
Inquisition of the Roman Catholics. But Martin Luther’s own obsession with evil and
witchcraft, along with the Protestant cultural tendency to allow the laity to engange in
witch-hunting activities for God and profit — the “work ethic” meets the Inquisition —
made the newly Portestant nothem Europe no less likely to pursecute witches than the
conservative Roman Catholic south.
What does all this mean for our purpose of exploring the essence of the left-hand path?
Ironically, and perhaps unfortunately, the vast storehouse of western European imagery
relating to “Devil worship,” witchcraft and “Satanism” is for the most part the invention of
the church and witch-hunters. This leads us to conclude that the invented evidence is
largely useless for the discovery of any true left-hand path ideas current in this period. To
rely on this evidence to discover anything about the Satanism of the period would be
somewhat like trying to determine the actual character of modem Satanism from Dennis
Wheatly novels and Hollywood horror films.
The Faustian Path
At the end of the medieval period in Germany a whole tradition of magic arose which
was associated with the name of Dr. Faustus. The tradition originated at a time
contemporary with other great magical thinkers, such as Agrippa von Nettesheim (1486-
1535) and Paracelsus von Hohenheim (1493-1541), and the spiritual revolutionary Martin
Luther (1483-1546). The study of the Faustian tradition is best understood on several
levels. There is the actual historical man, probably named Georg Faust(us), the legends
which grew up around and attached themselves to his figure after his death (around 1540),
and the subsequent complex artistic tradition which actually continues to grow. Without
doubt, since the demise of the ancient ways in the north, this man was one of the first new
masters of the left-hand path— for through magic and dealing with the Dark Side he
managed to become part of myth and legend and has become thereby immortal.
The historical Faust was probably bom in or near Knittingen in southwestern Germany
in 1480 and died near there at Staufen in 1539 or 1540. He was bom with the first name
Georg (or Jorg). An early tradition changes the name to Johann(es) for some unknown
reason. The name or title “Faust(us)” could either be from the plain German name Faust
(“fist” or “club”) with the addition of the Latin ending -us, or it could be a later title from
Latin faustus (“favored” or “lucky one”).(24) (It has been noted that Simon Magus also
went by that title in Latin.)(25) In one primary document he also calls himself Sabellicus.
This could be a mythic reference to the ancient tribe in Italy called the Sabellians — thought
to be experts in magic — or perhaps it is only a Latinization of his ordinary name, which
might have been Zabel.(26)
81
Whatever the man’s name, there are some definite details of his life and travels, even if
these details are scanty. He was reputed to be an expert — if only semi-leamed — in
magic, astrology, necromancy and all the occult arts of his day. From about 1507 to 1513
he lived and taught on a freelance basis in Heidelberg where he came to be known as “the
demigod of Heidelberg.” In 1513 he was active in Erfurt— where he conjured images of
Homeric myth while giving lectures to awestruck students. In the 1520s he lived in or near
Wittenberg— the epicenter of Protestantism where Martin Luther had nailed his 95 theses
to the church door in 1517. At least at the beginning of this time (in 1520) he appears to
have been employed by the Roman Catholic bishop of Bamberg— which suggests all sorts
of intrigues.
A document from the city of Ingolstadt dated 17 June, 1528 states that Faust was
forcibly exiled from the city— but only after he had vowed not to take (magical) vengeance
on the city leaders. It appears that Faust was often eventually ejected from cities where he
made impact. He always lived in university towns and taught and influenced students
there— but not as part of the official faculty. Magically the claimed to have restored the lost
teachings of Plato and Aristotle and to be able to equal the miracles of Christ (27) In 1534
there is evidence that Faust wrote a set of predictions for the German explorer Philipp von
Hutten before a voyage to South America. Von Hutten wrote to his brother in 1540 to
confirm the predictions. (28) During his career Faust is said to have openly declared that his
knowledge and power were the result of a pact he had made with the Devil. Whenever he
was exhorted to repent and return to the church he would reply that he preferred to remain
loyal to the Devil because he “has fairly kept what he promised me and therefore I intend to
keep fairly what I have promised and signed away to him ”(29) Shortly before his death
Faust returned to his native region in southwestern Germany and was found dead in the
city of Staufen. His enemies assumed he had been taken to Hell— approximately 33 years
after he first came on the scene as a disciple of he Devil in Heidelberg in 1507.
In the years immediately after Faust’s death legends and tales about his life proliferated
and grew in magnitude. Even in Faust’s lifetime his exploits were being merged with those
of legendary magicians. Wi thin 25 to 30 years of his death a Latin manuscript concerning
him was written by an anonymous student in Wittenberg. A German translation of this text
was made sometime in the 1570s and the Latin original was eventually lost The German
edition of the first Faustbuch (Faust-Book) was published by Johann Spiess in 1587 at
Frankfurt am Main. Its full title reveals much of its nature and purpose:
History of Dr. Johann Faustus, the notorious magician and necromancer.
How hie sold himself to the Devil for an appointed time, what strange
adventures he saw in that interval, himself inventing some and living through
others, until he received at last his well-deserved requital.
The book was immensely popular. It went through several reprintings that year and the
text was exported at once to England, as well as France (1598) and Holland (1592).(30) A
new edition of a Faust Book appeared complied by Georg Rudolf Widmann in 1599 which
contained more sensationalistic material and an even more moralistic tone. The main
purposes of the early Faust Books appear to have been to make as much money as possible
off of a lurid account of a wretched sinner and at the same time to preach with righteous
indignation against the prideful excesses of the human spirit. This combination of puerile
fascination and religious intolerance (mixed with a profit motive) is not foreign to our
world today.
It has been noted that the books are of a strongly orthodox Lutheran bias with anti-
Papal sentiments. In them the evil Dr. Faustus is sometimes contrasted with the good Dr.
Luther.(31) Basically the early Faust Books were reflections of the ordinary — and still
medieval — prejudices of the masses of the 16th and 17th centuries.
82
The Faust legend as recounted in these books became the main source for later literary
treatments. In the Faust Book the hero — or “villain” — is portrayed as a peasant’s son
who inherits a fortune. He goes to Wittenberg to study theology. He is talented, but
displays unusual characteristics which make him suspect. After a while he abandons
theology and takes up magic and medicine. In time he becomes a great physician knowing
the secrets of herbology and drugs. (This no doubt is a reflection of the historical figure of
Paracelsus.) But all this soon leads to his conjuration of demonic entities — and finally the
signing of a pact with Mephistopheles. In this age when it was still thought that “seekers of
knowledge outside the church were suspected of traffic with the minions of HelT(32) it
was widely believed that such a quest would be expressed through just such a pact with the
Devil. This would be in the form of a legal contract in which the seeker promised his soul
in return of sinful indulgence (or knowledge) for a specific period. In most Faust stories
this was for 24 years.
After the pact is signed Faust is indulged in all kinds of things. He receives food,
drink, clothing, money— as well as knowledge about Hell and the demons. He travels
widely over all of Europe— and loves to go play practical jokes on the Pope in Rome and
the sultan in Constantinople. Faust also visits Egypt and Asia— where he even sees the
Garden of Eden. But Faust soon turns his attentions to love. He summons Helen of
Troy— and spends years indulging in sexual excesses. In the end Faust is overcome with
remorse and fear and at a “last supper 7 ’ with his students he exhorts them to follow Christ
But on his last night Faust is indeed taken to Hell by a hoard of fiendish spirits.
In the first German Faust Books the chief sins of the magician are his “speculative”
interests, that is, his attempts to discover ways to enjoy pleasures which medieval morality
stigmatized as having their origins in the “seven deadly sins:” pride, greed, lust, anger,
gluttony, envy and sloth. (33)
As we know, the Faust material at once went over to England where it struck a
responsive cord. The poet Christopher Marlow (1554-1593) began his drama The Tragicall
History: the Life and Death of Doctor Faustus as early as 1588, probably finished it around
1590 — but it was not printed until 1604. Marlow was the first to write at all
sympathetically about Faust and bring the ideas of the Renaissance to his subject In The
Tragicall History it is clear that Faustus sells his soul not only for pleasure but for
knowledge and power. It is his will to become an earthly god through magic and to be able
to direct worldly politics by influencing the Pope and Holy Roman Emperor. Despite
whatever sympathies Marlow might have had with his subject, in the end Faustus is
condemned as in all the Faust Books. The complete “Faustian” treatment of Faust remained
for a more Faustian man to complete— J. W. von Goethe. We shall return to a transformed
Faust in the next chapter.
The Faustian tradition is not limited to the historical personage of Faust or artistic
fictionalizations of his adventures. There is also a tradition of practical magical manuals or
grimoires (“grammars”) which were reputed to be the very texts actually used by the
magician to conjure spirits and demons. These are important because they show that the
tradition was not merely literary but reflected an authentic school of magical operations. In
German culture of the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries the Faustians were not only exhorted
by literature to follow in the footsteps of their exemplary model, but were provided with
practical manuals purporting to tell them how to do just that
There are a number of manuscripts referred to as Faustian grimoires— supposedly ones
used or written by him. Most are in German, though some are in Latin. These were
collected as early as 1846 in J. Scheible’s series Das Kloster.{ 34) They bear titles such as
Doctor Faustens dreyfacher Hollenzwang (Dr. Faust’s Threefold Conjuration of Hell) or
D. I, Fausti Schwarzer Robe (D[r.j J[ohann] Faust’s Black Raven). These works are part
of the same general tradition that gave rise to the Sixth and Seventh Books of Moses
examples of which were also produced in Germany at about this time.
83
Almost all of these books appear to have been supplied with false dates and places of
publication. The printed dates sometimes go back before Faust’s time, while the places —
including Rome and Vienna — betray an interest in making the magical practices contained
in them particularly Roman Catholic.
The type of magical practices reflected in these books is fairly standard for medieval
sorcery. The magician draws a circle around himself which is full of prayers, names of
God or sacred symbols meant to protect him. Outside the circle there is a place —
sometimes within a triangle — where the sign (sigill) of the spirit to be summoned is
placed. Then, through prayers, conjurations and even threats, the magician calls up the
angel or demon to his presence in the triangle outside the circle before him. Once there the
magician deals with the entity, bargaining with it to try to obtain the particular gifts which
correspond to that entity.
In essence this kind of magic, whether it deals with angels or demons, is a right-hand
path practice insofar as it keeps the source of power and divinity (or diabolism) outside the
self and the magician. In the final analysis it will not be the power or gifts bestowed upon
the Faustian magician which will lead to his becoming a god-man, but the breadth and
depth of experience provided by this magic. It is what the Faustian magician learns from
his quest into the realms of the unknown beyond the limitations of time and space that is the
secret of the Black Raven .
The legends and even the motivation for the publication of the grimoires, had a purely
right-hand path bent The creators and publishers of the material were trying to hold onto
medieval thinking and philosophical morality for as long as possible and keep their
societies in its thraLL One authority puts it well:
Numerous are the legends built up around the personalities of men who defied
the taboos of their times and sought to probe the unknown nature of man and
the universe. Their strength lay in their “magic ” their power over the “right”
word; their weakness lay in their isolation, which invited distrust and
condemnation. (35)
The western Middle Ages were singularly inhospitable to left-hand path philosophy
because of the essentially anti-human bias of official church dogmas which tended to
dominate the period. The Renaissance would partially, but only partially, compensate for
the cultural losses incurred during the medieval epoch. It would not be until the 20th
century that the spiritual baggage of the Middle Ages could be dispensed with completely.
But even now the medieval period casts a shadow that can be seen in the shapes of modern-
day witch-hunters to TV evangelists. Nothing that has made an impact on the course of
human culture ever seems to disappear totally. Indeed the spirituality of the Middle Ages
can be seen alive and well on American cable television on a regular basis.
Notes for Chapter 5
(1) Thomas S. Bums, A History of the Ostrogoths (Bloomington, IN: Inddiana University Press,
1984), pp. 143-162.
(2) MIrcea Eliade, History of Religious Ideas (Chicago: University of Chicagor Press, 1982), vol. II,
pp. 387-389.
(3) See Henry C, Lea, History of the Inquisition in the Middle Ages (New York: Macmillan, 1888).
(4) Notman Cohn, Europe’s Inner Demons (New York: Basic Books, 1975)
(5) Cohn Europe’s Inner Demons , p. 1.
(6) Cohn Europe’s Inner Demons, p. 19.
(7) Eliade, History, vol. IH, p. 184.
. (8) Eliade, History, vol. HI, p. 182.
(9) Concerning these and others Free Spirit works of literature, see Newman Cohn, In Pursuit of the
Millennium (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961,2nd ed.), p. 315 ff.
(10) Cohn, In Pursuit of the Millennium, p. 172.
(11) Cohn, In Pursuit of the Millennium, p. 172.
(12) On Joachim of Fiore see Cohn, In Pursuit of the Millennium, pp. 99 ff. and Eliade, History, vol.
m,pp. 108-112.
(13) Cohn, In Pursuit of the Millennium, p. 108.
(14) Cohn, In Pursuit of the Millennium, p. 154-155.
(15) Cohn, In Pursuit of the Millennium, p. 150.
(16) Cohn, In Pursuit of the Millennium, p. 183-185.
(17) Cohn, In Pursuit of the Millennium, p. 175.
(18) Cohn, In Pursuit of the Millennium, p. 177-178.
(19) See Raymond B. Blakney, Meister Eckhart: A New Translation (New York: Harper and Row,
1941) and more generally Eliade, History, vol. HI, pp. 197-216.
(20) Anton LaVey, The Satanic Bible (New York: Avon, 1969), p. 25)
(21) H. Sprenger and J. Kramer (Institoris), Malleus Malficanm (London: Pushkin, 1928).
(22) Jeffery B. Russell, History of Witchcraft, (London: Thames and Hudson, 1980), p. 79.
(23) Russell, History of Witchcraft, p. 103.
(24) Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von. Faust, trans. and introduced and edited by Charles Passage
(Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs and Merrill, 1965), p. xxii.
(25) Hans Jonas, The Gnostic Religion (Boston: Beacon, p. 111.
(26) R-M. S. Heffner, et aL eds. Goethe’s Faust (Lexington, MA: Heath, 1954, p. 18.
(27) Heffner, Goethe’s Faust, p. 19.
(28) Passage, Faust, pp. xiv-xv.
(29) Passage, Faust, p. xiv.
(30) Heffner, Goethe’s Faust, p. 20.
(31) Heffner, Goethe’s Faust, p. 20.
(32) Heffner, Goethe’s Faust, p. 20.
(33) Heffner, Goethe’s Faust, p. 21.
(34) J. Scheible, Das Kloster (Stuttgart: [private], 1846), Fanst grimoires in vol H, pp. 807-930; vol
V, pp. 1059-1195.
(35) Heffner, Goethe’s Faust, p. 19.
85
Chapter 6
Lucifer Unbound
The Modern Age and New Understandings
1433-1900
Presaging the birth of the historical Faust in northern Europe certain social circles in
southern Europe — and especially in Italy — were undergoing radical transformations- The
northern Italian cities of Florence, Milan, Genoa and Bologna became the cradles of the
Modem Age in that period of cultural renewal we call the Renaissance.
Throughout the intellectually depressed period of the Middle Ages the spiritual treasures
of the humanities — the writings of Plato, Aristotle and other pagan philosophers — had
been grudgingly preserved in monasteries or had been cultivated in the intellectual haven
provided by a more tolerant Islamic culture. In the west these treasures were not
appreciated for the ideas they contained, but only for their utility in bolstering Christian
dogmas or their usefulness as rhetorical textbooks for classical studies.
In the decades just before and just following the watershed year of 1500 the western
world underwent a number of “revolutionary” changes. Throughout the 15th century
northern Italian guilds and trade associations had — using newly refined financial
institutions or banking — been able to build up powerful trading empires with connections
to the eastern Mediterranean. There they did business in centers such as Tyre, which was at
the end of trade routes reaching eastward to India and China. The wealth of this new class
of mean and families — such as the Medicis, Borgias and Sforzas — allowed them to
create a new culture separate from that dominated by the church or the old aristocracy. With
this new power came new interests in pagan national traditions and pagan rational
philosophy. The powerful families of the Florentine Renaissance became interested in
“things that worked.” It was this pragmatism that motivated much of their patronage of the
arts and sciences.
It is ironic that the most lasting result of the Crusades — the church-inspired wars
designed to “liberate” the sites in Jerusalem holy to Christians Land from the Muslims —
was an opening of Christendom to the economic and cultural influences of Islam and other
“eastern” civilizations. The “Holy Land” remained ultimately in Muslim hands.
Besides the crusades which sent tens of thousands of Christians (including children)(l)
to their horrible and useless deaths the Church had committed a number of other acts which
corroded its previously unquestioned position of spiritual authority— the Inquisition and
widespread institutional corruption of the priesthood and sacraments of the church. These
furthered widespread doubt about the veracity of church authority and dogmas. While on
the topic of that, there came such world shattering discoveries as Columbus’ discovery of a
“New World” (unrecorded in the previously thought to be universal book of knowledge—
the Bible) in 1492 or Copernicus’ discovery that the sun, not the Earth, was the center of
the planetary system, major cosmological underpinnings of the medieval world were turned
upside down. The final blow to the Middle Ages came with the success of the Protestant
Reformation (beginning 1517). For the first time since the beginning of the medieval period
the absolute ideological authority of the Roman Catholic Church had been challenged
effectively in the west Within a generation all of northern Europe had broken with Rome.
87
The early Renaissance flourished in the protected, yet often volatile and fragile, havens
for learning and the human spirit provided by the northern Italian families of patronage. It
was a time of true rebirth. Some were so bold as to attempt the overt revival or renewal of
the pagan Greco-Roman cult,(2) but the main purpose of most thinkers was to attempt a
synthesis of sophisticated pagan philosophy with medieval Christian symbolism. The
dominant philosophy emerging from the Florentine Renaissance was Neo-Platonism. In its
Renaissance form this philosophy was to be a pagan system of thought gilded with
Christian imagery for the sake of die consumption of the masses and of churchmen. It is
perhaps shocking, yet manifestly true, that the greatest art treasure of the Vatican itself—
the frescoes of the Sistine Chapel created by the “divine” Michelangelo — represent Neo-
Platonic allegory using Biblical scenes.(3)
The greatest exponents of Neo-Platonism in the Italian Renaissance were Marcilio
Ficino (1433-1499) and Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (1463-1494). What was most
relevant to the further development of the left-hand path in Renaissance thought was the
new found stature of the individual human being and of humanity in general.
Ficino wrote an essay called “Five Questions Concerning the Mind” (1495)(4) in which
he makes it clear — in keeping with pagan philosophy — that the h uman mind or will is
able, through rational means, to liberate and enlighten itself. So far, he is only in agreement
with most other pagan systems east or west which do not posit the necessity of God’s
grace in this process. The aim of the mind could still be either belonging to die right-hand
path (seeking ultimate union with the divine) or with the left-hand path (seeking
permanence and divinity for itself).
Perhaps one of the most inspirational documents of the Renaissance relevant to the (re¬
development of the left-hand path in the west is Pico della Mirandola’s “Oration of the
Dignity of Man.” (1486).(5) In this “oration,” which was to be the inaugural speech for a
series of disputations concerning his 900 theses at the university in Florence, Pico
discusses two major themes: the nature and dignity of humanity and the pursuit of the
“unity of truth.” In the latter he began syncretizing all philosophical and religious systems
to find the unity holding them all together in truth. It is, however, the first theme that
concerns us most
The “Oration” contains a passage in which Pico has the Creator say to Man:
The nature of all other beings is limited and constrained within the bounds of
laws prescribed by Us. Thou, constrained by no limits, in accordance with
Thine own free will, in whose hand We have placed Thee, shall ordain for
Thyself the limits of Thy nature.... Thou shah have the power, out of Thy
soul’s judgment, to be reborn into the higher forms which are divine.(6)
Pico holds that humanity finds itself in this world in an unfinished or indeterminate
state of being. Humanity stands at the center of creation— it can evolve to the divine or
devolve to the bestial. The soul of an individual is what is responsible for these
transformations. It is precisely because of the “self-transforming nature” that m ankin d can
be seen as noble. Man is the only creature not determined by nature but by will or
consciousness, he can exist outside the hierarchy of nature and God in a separate order.
— “Old Nick” —
Another side of the Renaissance was shown by the first master of modem politics—
Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527). His most famous book. The Prince (written 1513)
develops a political philosophy radically at odds with the Christian theory. Instead of
deriving all power from God, Machiavelli sees that dealings with God must be based on
pure faith, while political aims must be pursued in an atmosphere of pure reason— in order
that the rational and virtuous ends of government may be achieved. The morality of the
means used to realize these ends is measured purely in terms of their effectiveness. The
88
ends justify the means. As a ruler, Machiavelli concludes, it is better to be feared than to be
loved — “since love depends on the subjects, but the prince has it in his own hands to
create fear, the wise prince will rely on what is his own...”(7)
His cosmology, at least for political purposes, did not place God in a central position.
He saw political affairs as largely the result of the interplay between virtue said fortune (or
“fate”)-
The ideas and theories of Machiavelli had a profound effect on the advent of the modem
world. His words have echoed throughout history since his death— as he dared to write
what others only kept hidden in their hearts.
Machiavelli did not attack religion or Christianity directly, and always focused his
attention on the practice of virtue , and “the Good,” but because he largely ignored the
importance of the Church and God in his political theory he was seen as a threat to the
power of the religion. This which may have earned him his cognomen 'Old Nick.”
The Renaissance represents the infancy of the Modem Age which would eventually
allow for the practice of more left-hand path philosophies. This Modem Age with — its
increased interest in the stature and nobility of the individual human spirit along with
reason, coupled with a new valorization of nature or physicality as the matrix of divinity
rather than a barrier or hindrance to it all—led to later developments in the left-hand path.
— Lucifer and the Enlightenment —
In reality the Renaissance had been as much or more a revival of ancient things or a
continuation of medieval ones than it was an innovation of new forms of thought More
radical solutions were sought by the liberated minds of the 17th and 18th centuries.
Tradition of all sorts was suspect of gross error and scientific methods were pursued by
which each individual could prove the nature of himself and the world (seen and unseen)
around him. If Satan — the Adversary of God — is ever to be equated with the
independent, incarnate, human mind in a rationally enlightened state of being, then it is in
the Enlightenment that he finds his first home since the advent of Christianity in Europe.
The foundations of the Enlightenment rest with such thinkers as Francis Bacon (1561-
1626) in England and Rend Descartes (1596-1650) in France. In his major work Novum
Organum (1620) Bacon championed a purely inductive method of reasoning which
challenged all forms of received or “revealed” knowledge. All intellectual or spiritual
authority was questioned more radically than ever before. Descartes, on the other hand,
attempted to create a mathematical system of deductive reasoning. (His most famous
formulation, cogito ergo sum (I think, therefore I am), is in fact one of the keystones to any
left-hand path philosophy. What can be known with the most certainty about reality is our
existence as individual entities. This brings psychecentricism again to the forefront of
western thought Descartes himself realized the “diabolical” implications of his ideas on
some level and tried for much of his life to reconcile his system with Christianity. But the
genie was out of the bottle. By 1687 Isaac Newton (1642-1727) had published his
Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy in which he presented a unified, rational,
coherent theory of the mechanics of the universe as known in his time.
— To Rule in Hell —
The English poet John Milton (1608-1674) gave expression to some of the new
religious attitudes and paradoxes in his epic work Paradise Lost (1667). Milton’s protestant
subjectivism allowed him to feel his way into the mythological figures in the Old Testament
tale of the rebellion of Satan so deeply that when he gives voice to Satan and other demons
of the pit— a heroic and highly sympathetic characters emerge. This is especially true in the
first part of the poem.
In the Second Book of Paradise Lost Mammon speaks and puts words on the
grievances of the minions of Hell:
89
Suppose he should relent
And publish Grace to all, on promise made
Of new Subjection; with what eyes could we
Stand in his presence humble, and receive
Strict Laws impos’d to celebrate his Throne
With warbl’d Hymns, and to his Godhead sing
Forc’t Halleluiahs; while he Lordly sits
Our envied Sovran, and his Altar breathes
Ambrosial Odours and Ambrosial Flowers,
Our servile offerings. This must be our task
In Heav’n, this our delight; how wearisom
Eternity so spent in worship paid
To whom we hate. Let us not then persue
By force impossible, by leave obtained
Unacceptable, though in Heav’n our state
Of splendid vassalage, but rather seek
Our own good from our selves, and from our own
Live to our selves, though in this vast recess.
Free, and to none accountable, preferring
Hard liberty before the easy yoke
Of servile Pomp. (II: 11. 237-257)
Perhaps unconsciously Milton gave voice to the Romantic rebellion ag
conventional moral and religious authority in the generations to come.
In part perhaps because the Age of Reason was moving away from traditional images
of God, there was also a move away from the images of the traditional Devil. Bolstered by
the scientific theories of Newton, a new school of religious thought called Deism arose.
Deists posit that a perfect and good God would only — and could only — create a perfect
and good universe. From this it may be seen to follow that all apparent “evil” is actually
misperceived good. This is the essence of the philosophy of Optimism championed by
Gottfried W. Leibnitz (1646-1716) and the English poet Alexander Pope (1688-1744) who
wrote in his Essay on Man:
All nature is but art, unknown to thee;
All chance, direction, which thou canst not see;
All discord, harmony not understood;
All partial evil, universal good;
And, spite of pride, in erring reason’s spite.
One truth is clear. Whatever is, is right
However, there was also a more rebellious side to the Enlightenment one that saw the
political, religious and philosophical establishment — all predicated on the Christian
concept of God — as an ideological foe. These, more than most, might tend to see the
image of the old Christian Devil as a hero and role model. This rebellion of reason on earth
was seen by some to be a reflection of the Rebellion in Heaven undertaken by Lucifer—
who could now be restored as a figure bearing the light of reason and liberty. Some
hundred years after the Enlightenment anarchists such as Mikail Bakunin will also see
Lucifer in this same role. (See below.)
— The Hell-Fire Club —
One of the organizations of the past widely thought to be Satanic in nature was the so-
called Hell Fire Club in England. This group was repeatedly written about in dozens of
books about Satanism and black magic from its own time in the 1700s to many lurid
90
accounts written in this century. Eric Towers in his book Daskwood discusses and refutes
most of these in some detail.(8) The Hell Fire Club was supposed to have wild orgies and
Satanic Black Masses as a regular part of their activities. The true nature of the Club was
much more complicated— and ultimately much more dangerous to the establishment than
mere debauchery and mockery of Popery.
There were historically two separate and apparently unrelated groups to which the name
“Hell Fire Club” was attached. Only the first of these, the one founded by Philip the Sixth
Duke of Wharton in 1719, ever called itself by that name. The purpose of the Club was “to
proclaim a profound contempt for established morality, thought and theology.”(9) This
Club met in the Greyhound tavern near St. James Square. They named the Devil himself as
their president and three of the leading members went by the names te Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost ”(10) This association attracted a great deal of attention to itself and was eventually
banned and disbanded (in 1721) after much bad publicity. Philip went on to found the
“Schemers”— a sort of society of rakes who occasionally got together for sexual escapades
in the company of women who were customarily masked. This masking was ostensibly
because the ladies were reputed to be of high stature in society .(11)
However, usually to the group founded by Sir Francis Dashwood (1708-1781) that the
name Hell Fire Club (and most sensationalistic activities) have been ascribed. Dashwood
founded two relevant societies: the Society of Dilettanti (in 1736) and the club that met near
his estate of West Wycombe at Medmenham Abby after about 1751. The Dilettanti group
was set up for the social gatherings of young Englishmen who had traveled to Italy. They
would meet on the first Sunday of the month at the Bedford Head tavern in Covent Garden
to dine and have learned and ribald discussions about their adventures in Italy. The actual
name of the latter society is uncertain, but it seems to have been formed from Sir Francis’
first name as a pun on the Popish order. The Friars of St. Francis or the Society of St.
Francis are possible conjectures.(12) The “Friars” group is the one erroneously referred to
as the “Hell Fire Club” in popular literature.
The good “Friars of St Francis” were mostly well-to-do local friends of Sir Francis
and not especially highly placed government officials; although Dashwood was a Member
of Parliament, even becoming Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1763, and remaining a
government official until his death. He was a close acquaintance of Dr. Benjamin Franklin
of Pennsylvania but their association appears to have been more of an official nature. There
is no evidence for Franklin being one of the “Friars.” Franklin did visit West Wycombe in
1773 and at one point Dashwood gave him a copy of a draft of a new version of the Book
of Common Prayer Dashwood had written. In it Sir Francis had deleted all references to the
Old Testament and made the whole more brief. He said of the Old Testament: “[It] is
allowed to be an accurate and concise history and, as such, may and ought to be read at
home... It is a Jewish book, very curious, perhaps more fit for perusal of the learned rather
than suited to the capacitys [sic] of the general illiterate part of Mankind.”(13)
Dashwood was certainly not a “Satanist.” But what he was was perhaps more
damaging to the cultural establishment than any occult antics would have made him. Like
his acquaintance Ben Franklin, and like many of his Age of Reason contemporaries,
Dashwood was outwardly orthodox but inwardly he was a Deist This allowed for many
divergent intellectual and spiritual views in Dashwood’s life. His interest in Classical
antiquity and spiritual values is reflected in his (what at first seems whimsical) construction
of Temples to Apollo and Bacchus (Dionysius) on his West Wycombe estate. Dashwood
had perceived the divergent tendencies of rationalism (Apollo), and of intuition and ecstasy
(Dionysius) in Greek religion a full century before that other “Antichrist” Friedrich
Nietzsche did so in his Birth of Tragedy .. . . . ___ . _
Another curiosity in the history of magic is reflected in the inscription Dashwood had
placed over the entrance to the Abby: Fay ce que voudras , Do what you will. This was
lifted directly from a reference to the “Abby of Thelema” in Rabelais’ work Gargantua and
PantureL(l5) This was, of course, again taken up by the English magician Aleister
91
Crowley. (See chapter 8.) The Abby at Medmenham, by the way, had been a genuine
Cistercian establishment in the 13th century. The building ruins were in the Gothic style,
which was further enhanced by Sir Francis who wished to have a “Gothick” — or northern
— aesthetic to complement the classicism of the temples to Apollo and Bacchus.
Unfortunately Dashwood did not leave behind extensive writings detailing his
philosophies— or if he did they were destroyed. But if he had it is certain that they would
have been little serious discussion of Satanism in them.
The late 18th century was a time of violent and bloody revolution. In America the king
of England, George HI, who held himself to rule by Divine Right, by the Grace of God
Almighty, was indicted by Thomas Jefferson of Virginia as a gross violator of Natural
Law. On the principles of Reason and Natural Law the revolutionaries declare their enmity
to the Divinely ordained tyrants of 18th century Absolutism. In the much extoled, yet now
little read, 'Declaration of Independence” Jefferson wrote:
When in the Course of h uman events, it becomes necessary for one people to
dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to
assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which
the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the
opinions of m ankin d requires that they should declare the causes which impel
them to the separation.
George’s defence would be that he, as king, was placed in his position by the Grace of
God— and that to oppose the will of the king was tantamount to opposing that of God.
The revolutionary Republicans of America and France were seen by the authorities as
agents of the Devil trying to “import” the otherworldly revolt in heaven to the political
systems of the states of the world. In principle the establishment of the day was correct,
and events of the 20th century have recorded at least a partial victory for this Temporal
Revolt Revolutionary Republicanism goes against every idea of medieval Christian
political theory essentially based on the Pauline formula: “...there is no power but of God”
(Romans 13:1) coupled with strictly authoritarian hierarchical theories of political
organization inherited from Middle Eastern sources through Roman Imperialism.
Republicanism, without abandoning the pagan ideals of an aristocracy of merit attempts to
plurali 2 e the power centers of society. From the viewpoint of medieval Christian sentiment
this would amount to a “Pandemonium.”
Satan was little championed among the Republicans but the authority of the Church was
widely and vigorously challenged in the name of Deism and Pietism. The point of view
was usually taken that Jesus was a good and noble man and teacher of great moral values
and truths who had been betrayed in death by unscrupulous followers. Thomas Jefferson
went so far as to create the so-called “Jefferson Bible” which consisted of the words of
Jesus extracted from the rest of the Biblical narrative, which he rejected.(16) The Old
Testament was roundly rejected by Deists in to to. The great American patriot Thomas Paine
wrote a scathing attack on the Bible is his controversial work The Age of Reason.(11) In
this book Paine lampoons the whole Christian story of Satan. After first observing that the
story of Satan’s rebellion and exile from Heaven seems borrowed from pagan mythology,
Paine makes the following analysis:
The Christian Mythologists, after having confined Satan in a pit, were
obliged to let him out again to bring on the sequel of the fable. He is then
introduced into the Garden of Eden, in the shape of a snake or a serpent, and
in that shape he enters into f amili ar conversation with Eve, who is no way
surprised to hear a snake talk; and the issue of this tete-a-tete is that he
persuades her to eat an apple, and that eating of that apple damns all of
m ankin d.
92
After giving Satan this triumph over the whole creation, one would have
supposed that the Church Mythologists would have been kind enough to send
him back again to the pit; or, if they had not done this, that they would have
put a mountain upon him (for they say that their faith can remove a mountain),
or have him put under a mountain, as the former mythologists had done, to
prevent his getting again among the women and doing more mischief. But
instead of this they leave him at large, without even obliging him to give his
parole— the secret of which is, that they could not do without him; and after
being at the trouble of making him, they bribed him to stay. They promised
him ALL the Jews, ALL the Turks by anticipation, nine-tenths of the world
beside, and Mahomet [Muhammed] into the bargain. After this, who can
doubt the bountifulness of the Christian Mythology. (18)
The even more radical French revolutionists were not satisfied with the rationalistic
Deism of the Anglo-Americans. Many among them wanted the official demise of the
Church and its replacement with a neo-pagan religion or pure Reason. More and more, the
image of Lucifer and the idea of Reason will become associated as the conflict between
“faith” and “reason'’ becomes ever sharper in the Modem Age.
In the “mainstream" of divergent 18th century thought — whether Neo-Classicist or
Romantic — the invocation of a new sacred formula “Nature” usually called to mind an
orderly, benevolent (or at least neutral), even “rational,” system. Whether it was the
Natural Law of the Neo-Classicist or the “back to nature” sentiment of the Romantics,
Nature was the New God(-dess) defining the best aspirations of an enlightened mankind.
The Divine Marquis
At least one man stood against this all-pervasive sentiment: Dontien Alphouse Francois
Marquis de Sade (1740-1814). Although for reasons that will soon become apparent, the
“Divine Marquis”(19) was not what we might call a true Satanist, he has been widely
thought to have been a paragon of evil and called “Satan’s Saint.”(This is the title of novel
based on de Sade by Guy Endor.) But was his philosophy, which remained immature, one
on the roots of the modem left-hand path?
Philosophically the Marquis de Sade was a radical materialist In this idea he was
following his countryman Julien Offray de la Mettrie (1709-1752). La Mettrie held that the
soul — or any other previously thought to be “spiritual” part of man — was in fact entirely
physical or chemical in its nature. In this idea he was, of course, following the philosophy
of the ancient Epicureans. He acknowledged this philosophical debt in his book 77te
System of Epicurus . These ideas were so radical for his time that he was exiled from
France and his books burned. One of his most important books was Man a Machine. La
Mettrie eventually found his way to the court of the Prussian king Frederick the Great, who
became his patron. Among La Mettrie’s ideas which were to influence de Sade profoundly
were that the imagination — the image-forming ability — is the chief function of the soul
and that there is a close correspondence between a person’s appearance and his or her
character. (20) These ideas also appear to have influenced Anton LaVey.
The works of the Marquis de Sade hare hardly sexual or “pornographic” documents as
is widely thought by those who have never read them. They are truly works of philosophy
or “anti-theology.” Every page de Sade writes reeks of his deep rage in the face of the
Roman Catholic God of 18th century France. This rage stems from the same idealism
which moved Deists. All theological evidence of God, be it from the Bible of pious
churchmen, objectively pointed to a cruel and despotic God whose agents hypocritically
claimed omnibenevolence for him. The God of the Bible and Church is manifestly wicked
and villainous. But in this Age of Reason, this conclusion did not necessarily lead to the
idea that the enemy of God, Satan, must be a hero. The whole Judeo-Christian tradition
tended to be rejected as superstitious nonsense.
93
On occasion the Devil is spoken well of in de Sade’s works. One passage of
Philosophy in the Bedroom (1795) sums up de Sade’s attitude toward God and the Devil
and is spoken by the character Dolmance:
Had man been formed wholly good, man should never have been able to do
evil, and only then would the work be worthy of god. To allow man to
choose was to tempt him; and God’s infinite powers very well advised him
what would be the result Immediately the being was created, it was hence to
pleasure that God doomed the creature he had himself formed. A horrible
God, this God of yours a monster! Is there a criminal more worthy of our
hatred and or implacable vengeance then here!...
More powerful than this villainous God, a being still in possession of his
power, forever able to brave his author, the Devil by his seductions
incessantly succeeds in leading astray the flock that the Eternal reserved unto
himself. Nothing can vanquish the hold this demon’s energy has upon
us. (21)
At fust de Sade sees Nature as a neutral force— the true creatrix of the world. She is
the actual first cause , not “God.” But de Sade soon discovers what he determines the actual
meaning of Nature is for Man: corruption and destruction. This is made explicit in a
passage in Juliette (1794) which could be taken as de Sade’s manifesto on Nature. With
fitting irony he places the words in the mouth of the Bishop of Rome.(22)
The Pope says:
No earthly creature is expressly formed by Nature... all are the result of her
laws... very different creatures probably inhabit other globes... But these
creatures are neither good nor beautiful, precious nor created... they are the
result of Nature’s un thinkin g operations.
Once cast man has nothing further to do with Nature; once nature has cast
him, her control over man ends; he is under the control of his own laws that
are inherent in him... [Tjhese laws are those of his personal self-preservation,
of his multiplication... laws which are... vital to him but in no way
necessary to Nature, for he is no longer of Nature, no longer in her grip, he is
separate from her. If man destroys himself, he does wrong— in his own
eyes. But that is not the view Nature takes of the thing. As she sees it, if he
multiplies he does wrong for he usurps from Nature die honor of a new
phenomenon... [0]r multiplication... is therefore decidedly detrimental to the
phenomena whereof Nature is capable.
Thus those that we regard as virtues become crimes from her point of
view... The most wicked individual on earth, the most abominable, the most
ferocious, the most barbarous, and the most indefatigable murderer is
therefore but the spokesman of her desires, the vehicle of her will, and the
surest agent of her caprices.
De Sade sees Nature as a mechanical creatrix possessing only the will to propagate
herself. But she is limited by her own laws so that this can not occur as long as the
creatures already formed continue to live and multiply. Therefore she can not propagate
herself anew until the present creatures have been eliminated. When a human therefore
undertakes to destroy life, to degrade and defile it, he or she is doing Nature’s will.
Humanity is now separated from Nature’s will and control, but when humans act in
accordance with the hidden “will” of Nature, they are rewarded with pleasure and success.
When they act contrary to the will of Nature, they are visited with pain and failure.
94
The human faculty of imagination is the key to de Sade’s psychology. ‘Imagination is
pleasure's spur... directs everything, is the motive for everything; is it not thence that our
pleasure comes?”(23) In de Sade’s grand scheme, of course, it is the imagination which
spurs man to act in accordance with the destructive desires of Nature. However, even if
one rejects de Sade’s cosmology, his psychology remains of interest It is here that his
ideas concerning the erotic enter his philosophy most directly. Ultimately, de Sade holds
that the pursuit of pleasure is the object of human life, and that physical satisfaction is more
noble than the merely mental. Happiness depends on the greatest possible extension of
pleasure. This is done by enlarging the scope of one’s tastes and fantasies. It is only
through willful imagination that the possibilities for pleasure are extended. Social or
religious conditioning prevents this in most cases. Finally, happiness is not so much found
in the enjoyment of pleasure as in the desire itself and in the destruction of obstacles in the
way of its accomplishment
De Sade posited that there were essentially three kinds of people erotically speaking: 1)
those of weak or repressed imagination, courage and desires— and who live without
remarkable incident; 2) “natural perverts” — who act out of obsession which is usually
congenital in origin, and 3) libertines— who consciously develop their fantasies and who
set about to realize them. It is this third category, the libertines, which de Sade saw as the
apex of humanity. Libertines, through active use of the imagination, transform themselves
through acts of will — in accordance with Nature. For de Sade the greatest pleasures were
to be found in overcoming things which may have at one time inspired fear or disgust. (24)
Whether in the sexual or more abstract philosophical sphere, the truest definition of
Sadism — or perhaps we should use the term Sadeanism to distinguish it from the
pathological terminology of current psychiatry — is: “The pleasure felt from the observed
modifications on the external world produced by the will of the observer.”(25) That this
definition could serve equally well when describing the pleasure artists feel when working
in their media should not be overlooked.
The importance of the “Divine Marquis” to the modem left-hand path lies not so much
in the most essential aspects of his philosophy as in its reception— especially its erotic
component — by Anton LaVey in die 20th century. De Sade’s philosophy is to a great
extent underdeveloped. His philosophical writing career only lasted some 15 years; years
spent in prisons and asylums hardly conducive to the development of a reflective system.
There seems to be an inherent internal antagonism between de Sade’s professed radical
materialism and the assigned role of the will and imagination in the process of transforming
human beings into his idealized libertines. While de Sade rightly rejected as pure expedient
illusion the whole notion of the God of the Church, he also saw a dark side to the face of
Nature so extoled by Neo-Classicists and Romantics alike. For him there was a demonic
side to nature which he only reluctantly and sparingly would ever identify with the Devil.
He was right not to do so. For that thing which he glimpsed seems closely akin to the
substance of Yahweh Elohim— the dark Demiurge of the Gnostics and “Sadistic” creator
of the material universe.
Fniiphtpnme.nt thou gh t rejected both the traditional God of the Church and the Devil in
favor of Nature and a perfect creator God— perfect in his Reason. These ideas are further
refined in the Neo-Classical period which will again be more hospitable to images from the
past— at least as literary motifs.
The Dawn of the Faustian Age
Although the Middle Ages had ended in a historical sense during the 1500s, elements
inherent in medieval culture, such as political Absolutism, continued to be a part of the
established cultures until the early 19th century. The legacy of the Middle Ages still
continues to haunt us on the brink of the 21st century, but it is in the theme of Faust,
inh erited from medieval literature of the propagandists intolerance, that we can see the
cultural transformation from those times into a kind of universal “Faustian Age.” Whether
the pact our culture signed will have its desired effects waits to be determined.
95
Whenever I have the opportunity to teach Faust in a literature or humanities course, I
like to point out a certain attitudinal fact to the students. First, I tell them of the origins of
the Faustian literature. How it had been written to warn would-be dabblers in the “Black
Arts” away from seeking three things forbidden by orthodox cultural authority in the
Middle Ages: knowledge, power and pleasure. But, I ask of my bright cheeked students,
are these not the three culturally legitimate reasons you are sitting in this class today?
Perhaps for the idealistic reason of gaining knowledge , perhaps for the pragmatic reason of
potential career advantages a degree will bring (power ), or perhaps for the pure fun of
learning— none of which would have been found short of sinful to die medieval mind-set
We live, for better or worse, in a Faustian, some might go so far as to say a “Satanic,”
Age. By this I do not wish to imply that the times are in any intrinsic way evil. They are,
however, times of transformation and change.
— Goethe and Faust —
The greatest single poetic monument describing the spiritual position of humanity in the
Modem Age is Faust: Fine Tragddie by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832).
Goethe was himself the paragon of the “Faustian Man” as he defined — or re-defined — it
in his work. It could have been no less, because the poetic drama of Faust was actually a
kind of “spiritual autobiography” of the poet himself. The work appeared in two parts. Part
I was published in 1808 and part U, only finished just before his death, was published in
1832. But the poet actually began to work with the Faust material as early as 1770-1775. In
his old age Goethe said that he worked on Faust “without plan and without a break.”
On one level Goethe follows much of the outline of the traditional Faust literature. But
his work is on the surface more fragmentary, yet possessed of an inner level of the same
coherence and archetypal unity as the author’s own soul.
Goethe was no mere poet He was a philosopher and a talented scientist as well as a
professional statesman. He may have teen one of the last truly “Renaissance Men.”
Beginning around 1768 he studied alchemical and magical texts intensively. But his
spirituality was to remain always a highly individualistic one. A family friend, Susanna von
Klettenberg, introduced the young Goethe to pietism and spiritism. Ultimately Goethe’s
philosophy and spirituality was a unique synthesis of the ideas of his time coupled with his
own inner vision. Throughout his life Goethe built an enormous reputation for himself
through his writings. By the time of his death he had reached the level of a living culture
hero of international stature.
Goethe’s Faust begins with a “Prolog in Heaven” in which the Lord wagers with
Mephistopheles that he can not tempt Faust — the representative of all Mankind — to
ruination. This exchange is, of course, based on the beginning of the biblical book of Job.
Meanwhile, Faust is a highly dissatisfied man. He has attained all the knowledge available
in the world— yet he thirsts for more. So he turns from scientific pursuits to magic . With
the aid of magical grimoires he first conjures the Earth-Spirit and then attempts to conjure
the Devil. At first he is apparently unsuccessful, and. therefore concludes to end his life.
However, just as he is about to drink poison he is startled to new life by the tolling of
church bells on Easter morning. This demonstration of the depth of his commitment — to
both life and death — coupled with the magical formulas is successful in bringing the
Demon to him— at first in the form of a stray black poodle who follows him home.
Faust forms a pact with Mephisto unique in the Faustian literature. Because Faust
believes himself incapable of satisfaction — and does not desire it — he concludes a pact:
Werd’ ich zum Augenblicke sagen:
“Verweile doch, du bist so schon!”
dann magst du inich in Fesseln schalgen
dann will ich gem zugrunde gehn.
(If I ever say to any moment: / “Remain— you are so beautiful!” / then you may put me in
fetters / then I will gladly go to my death.)
96
This pact is unlike others in the Faustian literature in that it is not based on a time limit
Each party to the pact believes this to be to his own advantage: Mephisto believes he can
"satisfy” Faust quickly— so he will not have to wait years to obtain his soul, while Faust
believes that nothing can satisfy him— and so he will have the Devil’s services forever.
After this Faust and Mephisto set out on many adventures. In Part I they will explore
the mysteries of the microcosm— in Part n those of the macrocosm. These include the
seduction and eventual moral and physical destruction of an innocent milkmaid named
Margaret or “Gretchen.” (The name Margaret means “pearl” in Greek, and Goethe’s own
first love was named Gretchen.) Part I ends with Margaret about to be executed for the
murder of her illegitimate child by Faust
Part II is so fantastic in its scope that it has only rarely been staged. Central to this half
of the tragedy is Faust’s conjuration of, and union with, Helen of Troy— the eternal ideal
of feminine beauty. In the end— after many years of Mephisto's attempts to satisfy Faust’s
hunger for power and knowledge— that moment does come when Faust says of it—
Verweile dock , du bist so schonl This occurs while he is involved with claiming land from
the sea in Holland— in imitation of God’s separation of the earth from the waters. In the
end the Heavenly Host and the Infernal Legions fight over Faust’s soul A member of the
Heavenly Host, “a Penitent, once named Gretchen,” intercedes on behalf of Faust’s soul
and saves it from damnation. The final lines of the poem (11. 12104-12111) sung by the
"Mystical Choir” read:
Alles Verganghche
1st nur em Gleichnis;
Das Unzugangliche,
Hier wird’s Ereignis;
Das Unbeschieibliche
Hier ist’s getan;
Das ewig Weibliche
Zieht uns hinan.
(Everything that is transitory / is only an image; 1 the inaccessible here becomes actual
[there]; / the indescribable [there] / is enacted here; / the Eternal-Feminine / draws us
onward.)
Faust , an almost fluid document produced continuously throughout the poet’s life, is
the most vivid representation of Goethe’s philosophy. To be sure he made this philosophy
more explicit elsewhere in more prosaic forms. The key-word to Goethe’s philosophy is
said to be Werden (Becoming) or Wandelung (Transformation).(26) True to the Zeitgeist of
the Age of Reason Goethe saw “Nature” as an all-encompassing matrix of reality. For him
Nature was “a reality of matter and mind, a synthesis of substance and energy, in which the
gepragte Form [characteristic form] of any existing being was the necessary result of its
intrinsic purpose.”(27) So for Goethe Life — or existence — was a synthesis of substance
and energy “held together by an unbroken nexus of continuous change (‘ WerderC ).”(28)
His primary interest was the discovery of hidden archetypes or first forms; secondary to
this, but linked to it, was the observation of isolated “forms” in Nature. Man’s ability to
discern the archetypes is dependent upon the intellectual or spiritual development ( Bildung )
of the individual. In this view Man can not become a fully objective observer of a
continuously dynamic process of which he himself is a part(29) This is essentially the
modem synthesis of the ancient dichotomy of psyche mdphysis. It is clear that Goethe and
his contemporaries struggled with some of the same questions Plato had over two millennia
earlier. For Goethe fie Form is revealed by its particulars, each contributing to
understanding the Form.
97
There are, of course, many different kinds of interpretations of Goethe’s Faust. The
most convincing and eternally valid and useful, however, is one that sees the whole as the
story of the transformations of the soul of Modem Man— it is after all the spiritual and
poetic story of one exemplary model of one such man, Goethe himself. Such an
interpretation would see each of the major “characters” as archetypes within a single
evolving soul. Faust, Mephisto, Gretchen and Helen are all internal to the soul. The drama
is the story of the complex interactions of these archetypes within the soul through time.
The figure of Faust represents the self or l-consciousness which is the complex
psychological essence of Modem Man. Faust says of himself:
Zwei Seelen wohnen, ach, in meiner Brust,
die eine will sich von der anderen trennen:
die eine halt in derber Liebeslust
sich an die Welt mit ldammemden Organen;
die andere hebt gewaltsam sich vom Dust
zu den Gefilden hoher Ahnen.
(11.1112-1117)
(Two souls dwell, alas, in my breast, / one desires to separate itself from the other: / the
one clings to the world with clutching organs / in a dogged lust of love / the other lifts itself
forcibly from the gloom / toward the fields of sublime ancestors.)
This is indicative of the dichotomy of the strivings of modem man— one toward
material life and accomplishment and one toward intellectual advancement This echoes the
dual nature of the “sin” of m ankin d reflected in Judaic lore—one fleshly one intellectual.
Also, it foreshadows the two schools of the postmodern left-hand path.
Faust is a positive figure. He is a “yea-sayer” to life and all things in it. Yet there is —
as there must be — a void, an unrealized negative space in the soul, a shadow or darkness,
into which the soul may grow and evolve. This is the function of Mephisto. The demon is
the contrary, the adversary, to whatever is posited— the antithesis to Faust’s thesis. The
drama unfolds in the ongoing dynamic ( werdende ) synthesis of the two. Mephistopheles
says of himself:
[Ich bin] ein Teil von jener Kraft
die stets das Bose will und stets das Gute schaffl
(1. 1336)
and
Ich bin der Geist, der stets vemeint!
(1. 1338)
([I am] a portion of that power / that always wants evil, and always effects the good. I am
fie spirit, which always negates.)
The negation, or counterforce, of Mephisto is necessary to the dynamic process of
becoming. From within Faust is driven by a mysterious force — manifesting itself in his
sense of dissatisfaction — and is drawn onward by an equally mysterious force dwelling
outside his normal field of consciousness— “the Eternal-Feminine.”
This Eternal-Feminine is embodied in the figures of Margaret (Gretchen) in Part I (the
microcosm) and of Helen of Troy in Part II (the macrocosm). These are the two aspects of
the mysterious archetype that is the object of the seeker’s eternal longing. Gretchen is the
earthly reflection of fie ideal Helen. But through suffering Gretchen too is lifted into the
realm of the archetypal— and becomes the agent of Faust’s salvation. The left-hand path
connotations of this philosophy should be obvious from the discussion of the role of the
feminine in the left-hand path systems of Hinduism and Buddhism.
98
Faust is the modem exemplary model of spiritual heroism— complex and doomed to
freedom and to the quest for knowledge and power. Although some aspects of Goethe’s
Faust seem to be “Christian” m nature, neither the religion of Goethe nor the character he
created out of himself could be called “orthodox.” When Gretchen poses her famous
“Gretchen Question”— wie hast du’s mit der Religion? (what’s your position on religion?),
Faust answers in part:
Schau’ ich nicht Aug' in Auge dir,
Und drangt nicht alles
nach Haupt und Herzen dir,
Und webt in ewigem Geheimnis
Unsichtbar sichtbar neben dir?
Erfiill davon dein Herz, so gross es ist,
Und wenn du ganz in dem Gefuhle selig bist,
Nenn’ es denn, wie du wills t,
Nenn’s Gluck! Herz! Liebe! Gott!
Ich habe keinen Namen
Dafiir! Gefiihl ist alles;
Name ist Schall und Rauch,
Umnebelnd Himmelsglut
(Does my eye not gaze into your eye, / and doesn’t everything / press itself into your head
and heart / and weave in eternal mystery / the invisible made visible beside you? Fill your
heart with it, as great as it is / and when you are completely happy in that feeling, / call it
what you will, / call it happiness! heart! love! God! / I have no name / for it! Feeling is
everything; / A name is sound and smoke, / obscuring the glow of heaven.
To this Gretchen rightly replies: “...du hast kein Christentum (“...you have no
Christianity”). In this, of course, she is right in so far as orthodoxy is concerned. Faust,
and Goethe, have developed their own religion— a modern synthesis of all that has gone
before them.
In many ways with the modem Faust we return to the ideal man of pagan antiquity. If,
with the Socratic philosophies, we say that everything in the world has its special function,
and to fulfill that function is the Good of that thing, then Faust as the steadfast seeker of
knowledge and power may be seen as the exemplary model of human Good — not “evil”
_since mankind’s apparent unique function is to gain increasing consciousness and
organize increasing potencies. As long as Faust is true to his quest he does Good— and it
is this innate truth that “saves” him in the end. He is saved by the eternal object of his own
subjective questing the mysterious Eternal-Feminine.
To some extent Goethe revolutionizes the left-hand path in the west. But was he
himself a lord of the left-hand path? The answer, given our criteria, must be a reluctant no.
On one side the overriding implications of his great work, Faust , would seem to indicate a
left-hand path orientatioa However, his unequivocal philosophical position on the role of
man in nature and his decidedly ambiguous stance vis-a-vis the imagery of culturally
traditional “evil,” show him to be a manifestation of one of the “doubting angels” who took
neither side in the battle between Lucifer and the Trinity.(30)
— The Classical Devil —
Although Goethe may be considered a proto-Romantic by cultural historians, he
considered himself a Classicist, seems to sum up his general assessment
Classicism was the final flowering of the ideologies spawned in the Enlightenment— or
so-called Age of Reasoa In cultural history it may be said to be characteristic of the time
period from about 1700 to 1800. With Classicism, philosophy and aesthetics began to
return to the established forms of Greco-Roman ideals— but this was synthesized with the
99
Enlightenment concept of questioning and/or rejecting all forms of received knowledge.
The paradox here is obvious. The thoroughly modem split between the signifier and the
signified, or between the symbol and the symbolized, was complete. Things could be
regarded in a much more detached, “scientific” way.
In many respects Goethe fashioned the character of his Mephistopheles after the spirit
of the Age of Reason— inspired perhaps in part by the character and temperament of the
French philosopher Voltaire— rational, aloof, ironical.
Because at the time of the Enlightenment and Classicism popular and political culture
were still thoroughly dominated by the spirit of Absolutism there was some room iu
rational circles for revalorizing the “spirit of contradiction” (the Devil) as the spirit of
rationality. From our virtually postmodern perspective today it is clear that here we have the
beginnings of the split between the image or “sign” of the Devil and that which he had
signified in the pre-modem (medieval) world, i.e. “evil.” From this time on through the
remainder of the Modem Age serious attempts to deal with the Devil will come more and
more from the artistic rather than theological world.
In reality the true Devil, the exemplary model of magician ou the left-hand path, is fully
liberated again from the theological dungeon of medievalism with the advent of Classicism.
The gate was opened during the Renaissance, and his chains were broken by the
Enlightenment, but only with Classicism does he begin to walk the earth freely again. The
true essence of this Devil is, of course, the principle of isolate intelligence made aware of
this material embodiment. The Classical Devil is the human spirit exercising its freedom
and ratiouality, its fleshly existence and sense of beauty, its objectivity and sense of humor
against the grain of cultural and political Absolutism which continued to wrap itself in the
armor of divinely righteous justification.
The sense of humor displayed by the Classical and Enlightenment Devil is a powerful
aspect It at once tells us that the dungeon of medievalism had not dampened Old Nick’s
wit and that he remained clever enough to use his most devastating of weapons. It also
points to a certain disidentification between the image of the Devil and the world he begins
to find so ironically humorous.
From the point of view of the left-hand path today it is important to note that during this
dawn of the Modem Age the eternal values or principles which characterize the left-hand
path in any age or in any culture were in reality only liberated (and then only partially) to be
able to effect some of the work they had done in previous ages of western culture.
— Satan in the 19th Century —
The Devil and the Romantics
In most things the Romantics sought for the same ends and goals or held many of the
same ideals as the Classicists. But they went about it all in a precisely contrary fashion. The
Romantics reacted to the perceived sterility and rigidity of Classicism and wanted to infuse
human life with more emotion and vitalism. The essential hallmark of Romantic thought is
an inwardness (G. Innerlichkeit ) or subjectivity. This is in contrast to the objectivistic trait
of Classicism. The Romantics would extol feeling over thought. Jean-Jacques Rousseau
(1712-1778), the French father of Romanticism, said in his Confessions : “I felt before I
thought”(31) Where the Classical aesthetic had praised the simple, clear, exact and
complete, the Romantic aesthetic acclaimed the complex, obscure, approximate and
fragmentary.
In many ways Romanticism represents the final vital synthesis of western culture.
Although aesthetically and emotionally it extols the virtues of a return to bygone nights, to
“medievalism,” to the inner world of dreams (and nightmares)— the scientific methodology
and Classical modes of intellectual analysis are not rejected totally. But instead of the
physical universe being the favored object of inquiry, as with the Classicists, now the
history of human culture in all its aspects, life and the mysteries of the mind and soul retake
center stage.
100
The Classicist had celebrated the bright and clear virtues of southern European culture
— that of ancient Hellas and Rome — the Romantic would celebrate the dark and misty
inner landscapes of the North— both ancient and medieval. “Romanticism” is in fact such a
product of the Northern mind that it has been revalued as “German ticism” on occasion.
Perhaps a better term would be “Gothicism” which the Romantics themselves favored at the
time. With the inward turning of Romanticism came nationalism as that subjectivity was
expressed throughout the organic collective of individual nations. But on the level of the
individual person this inward turn was often manifested as an interest in the “demonic.”
For our subject the greatest effect of the Enlightenment, of “modernism,” had been the
permanent separation of the idea of evil from the image of the Devil. Once this modernist
separation was complete, the image of the Devil, or Satan, was liberated to undergo
revalorization in the hands of essentially Romantic artists and thinkers— who in many
instances proved to be powerful magicians on the stage of the history of ideas.
The Romantic revalorization of Satan, or the Devil, was primarily the work of the
English Romantic poets William Blake (1757-1827), George Gordon, Lord Byron (1788-
1824) and Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792-1822). Every Romantic seems to have had a
slighdy different feeling about the mythopoetic place of Satan, or Lucifer, in the scheme of
things.(32) But there are some important themes that hold most of them together as well.
To begin with, “God” and “Satan,” or other medieval theological terms, had become
essentially literary symbols for the modernist Romantics. This is uot to say they were not
real At first this may seem to trivialize the entities referred to by the terms— this especially
would seem so to medievalistic apologists such as J. B. Russell. In fact, Satan is not
“trivialized” by the poets— the symbol is revaluated and redeemed by makin g it again
relevant to human experience. They recognize that the essence of the meaning of human
existence is to be found not in a system of supposedly supernatural laws presided over by
institutionalized authority but rather in the experience of the individual heart and soul.
Because the medieval mind holds m anki nd to be in a sense “trivial,” all things which
symbolize and embody mankin d and its faculties are also so valued.
The Romantics see the Devil as a complex being or symbol. He is neither all-evil, or
all-good. He is a mixture of complex and ambiguous characteristics— as is the human soul
of which he is perhaps a projection. Mythically the Judeo-Christian figure of Satan was
combined with the Hellenic figure of Prometheus. This combination is an natural, as
Prometheus is in many ways the prototype of the Christian Devil. (See chapter 3.)
None of the Romantics could as yet call themselves “Satanists,” though they were often
called this by an outraged middle class populace. Essentially based on Milton’s portrayal of
him in Paradise Lost , Romantics did make him a heroic figure worthy of human emulation.
They admired Satan for his act of rebellion against legalistic and organized authority (=
God) and for his sublime existence, majesty and stubborn courage against all odds. They
could empathize with Old Nick.
Romantics are, however, obsessed with the concept of love. Although they could see
Prometheus as a lover of mankin d they still preferred to use the symbol of Jesus as the
paragon of love in their mythopoetic systems. This is not, however, the Jesus of historical
Christian tradition but one they claimed as the true Jesus. They may or may not have a
basis in the evidence, as we saw in chapter 4.
While the northern Romantics were engaged in creating new syntheses and in some
cases harkening back to pre-medieval mythology to explore the demonic, the French tended
to delve into more traditional diabolical imagery and feelings. Early French literary
Romanticism — founded by Frangois-Rene Chateaubriand (1768-1848) — was highly
sympathetic to the spirit of the Middle Ages, and against revolutionary thought (It was
quite the opposite in the north.) Most French Romantics remained firmly in the grip of
Catholic mythology, medieval aesthetics and anti-revolutionary sentiments. Demonic
imagery was principally used for its ironic impact or horrific effect Victor Hugo (1802-
1885) eventually developed a pro-revolutionary, anti-medieval position within French
101
Romanticism. His ideas are imaginatively explored in his historical novel Notre-Dame de
Paris (1831)— better known peAaps under the popular title “ Hunchback of Notre-Dame. ”
The Devil becomes a symbol for rebellion as well as alienation or separation from God—
God being seen Platonically as the Good, or Being. Thus God of the traditional churches is
rejected and replaced by the idea of infinite love. Satan is seen as an exemplary model of
the human condition— mixed with good and evil
The Romantic with the fondest emotions for the Devil seems to have been William
Blake. In his Marriage of Heaven and Hell (1790) Blake depicted Satan as a symbol of vital
creativity who struggles to be free of a coercively passive God.(33) Blake — who said of
Milton that he was of the “Devil’s party without knowing it” because he wrote of freedom
when he wrote of the Devil and of limitations when he wrote of God — took Miltonian
subjectivism one step further. Blake invented his own religion and his own mythology—
and presaged schools of thought in the 20th century. In Milton and Blake we see the roots
of the 20th century movement called “The Process, Church of the Final Judgement” (See
Volume IL)
In the midst of all this Romanticism one of the major roots of the coming occult revival
was being laid by Alphonse Louis Constant (1810-1875) who wrote seriously about the
idea of true Satanism. Constant is better known under his pseudonym Eliphas Levi. He
tended to portray the Devil in a positive light— when Levi supported revolutionary change
(mainly in the 1840s) Satan was the rebel, but later when Levi came to advocate the
establishment of law and order Satan was portrayed as the model ruler. In any event Levi’s
positive valuation of an occult Satan must be viewed as the forerunner to current
philosophical left-hand path thought in the west
In France the dark side of the Romantic movement developed into a variety of
sometimes bizarre pseudo-catholic sects on the one side, and the artistic-literary traditions
of Symbolism and Decadence on the other.
The father of the French Symbolist movement was the Romantic poet Charles
Baudelaire (182LI867). Baudelaire, himself, drew on the early American tradition of dark¬
ness found in Hawthorne, Poe and Charles Brocken Brown. His words were themselves a
gateway to darkness for such diverse figures as Kurt Seligmann, Clark Ashton Smith and
Diamanda Galas. Although he wrote such poems as “Litanies to Satan” in his Flowers of
Evil collection (1857), Baudelaire could in no meaningful way be described as a Satanist
The poet was one of those unfortunate souls who believed in the traditional ideas of God
and sin— and who was unable to prevent himself from committing sin.
Among the Decadents, Isidore Ducasse (1846-1870), who used the literary pseudonym
Lautreamont, is perhaps most interesting from the Satanic viewpoint His Les chants de
Maldoror (1868) is a neo-Sadean celebration of cruelty. Both Baudelaire and Lautreamont
were moved by a deep sense of outrage against hypocrisy both within themselves and in
the world around them. This opposition to hypocrisy and courage to face even the darkest
aspects of the human soul make the Decadents interesting from a left-hand path perspective.
Lautreamont is interesting in his connection of alienage with evil, foreshadowing such
modem writers as H. P. Lovecraft or Don Webb. However, their essentially aesthetic or
artistic context make them difficult to study from a philosophical viewpoint
James Webb puts the Symbolist/Decadent movement in the arts into an occult context
when he writes:
[Symbolists] set out... with assumptions which were anti-rationalist and anti¬
materialist to produce anti-naturalist art Because this approach was based on
a total rejection of the world it may be legitimate to call it “spiritual.” Whether
it led to “Satanism,” or the cult of the Beautiful, the face this reaction
presented to the public was uniformly rebellious. (34)
1
v
102
Whereas the aesthetics present us with obscure ideas beautifully wrought, the pseudo-
Satanic sect leaders demonstrate their doctrines quite clearly— or at least as clearly as they
are able Of these sects there were essentially two types, one which clung to medieval
metaphysics and cousidered itself generally Christian and the other more in line with the
Decadence of the literati- „ J
In August of 1839 Eugene Vintras, a manager of a cardboard-box factory m 1 rny-sur-
Seule in Normandy, France, had a vision of the Arch-Angel Michael, later the Virgin Mary
and St Joseph appeared to him. From these experiences he founded his own sect, the
“Work of Mercy” (Oeuvre de la Misericorde). This sect was soon linked with the poHucal
interests of the “Royalist Party” which wanted to restore a king to France— a shady
operation spearheaded by one Ferdinand Geoffroi, an acquaintance of Vintras in Tilly. The
sect grew rapidly, but ran afoul of establishment government officials and the highest levels
of the Catholic church— despite the fact that it was supported by some local priests. The
sect was declared heretical by the Pope in 1848— which only spurred its development.
Vintras now became the Pope of his own movement with his own priests. Women were
also admitted to the priesthood. The sect spread to England, Italy and Spain.(35)
The visions of Vintras have been compared to those of William Blake or Emmanuel
Swedenborg(36) in that they involve the perception of the dichotomy between extremes of
Heaven and Hell. But the rather unsophisticated Vintras could conceive of this only in
terms of what he had absorbed from Catholicism. So he cannot see the necessity of
reconciling the two extremes— instead he sets out to destroy what he identifies as the
“church of Satan.” There is every reason to believe that by this Vintras meant the official
orthodox Roman Catholic Church. w . r „ , -
At the same time, it is curious to note Pope Pius IX issued the Syllabus of Errors m
1864 in a theological attempt to cast all efforts toward radical social or cultural change in the
mold of a Satanic force in the world. Freemasonry was especially targeted, but so too were
other occult movements.(37) ... _ „
Vintras died in December of 1875 and one of his controversial priests, Abbe Boullan,
who had earlier that year been defrocked by the orthodox church, declared himself his
successor.(38) Boullan is perhaps most famous for the supposed magical cause of his
death in 1893. The ‘Work of Mercy” had been fighting the forces of evil marshalled all
around it for decades. These forces had come to include the Roman Catholic Church, but
also other occultists now engaged in what “the Work” held to be “black magic.” Then, as
now, these sinister forces tend to reside not in the objective universe, but in the paranoid
fantasies of the accusers. . „ . . . _
In any event there was a cadre of occultists of darker aspect active in France m the late
19th century. This group became the target of the accusations of the self-proclaimed “white
magicians” of the ‘Work of Mercy.”
The principal two occultists of this kind active in France at that time were Josepmn
Pdladan (1858-1918) and Stanislas de Guaita (1860-1898). It will become clear that neither
of these is a true left-hand path magician, nor a Sa tan is t— merely eccentric and decadent.
Peladan was the son of a school-master who edited a fanatically pro-royalist and
Catholic paper (Le Chatiment ). The father also made somewhat of a business of his
mystical speculations about the “sixth wound of Christ” (made on his shoulder by the cross
when he fell on the way to Golgotha)— there was a trade built up selling religious trinkets
commemorating this new found wound. His brother was a homeopathic healer and
cabalist Peladan ran afoul of the law as a protester against decrees banning unauthorized
religious congregations in 1880. In 1883 he went to Paris and entered artistic circles. He
heldhimself to be ultra-orthodox and at the same time a “magician”— by which he meant
“someone who is totally in control of himself.”(39) In 1884 he published his major work
La vice supreme. . ,
De Guaita had also come to Paris in 1880 and made his reputatiou as a poet and writer.
He published La muse noire in 1882. As a result of Peladan’s book, de Guaita met him m
103
1884 and the two formed an alliance that would last until 1890. In 1888 the two in
partnership founded the Odre Kabbalistique de la Rose-Croix. De Guaita was greatly
inspired by Baudelaire, whom he identified as the “Satanist” poet. It seems to be
Baudelaire’s use of drugs which most influenced de Guaita, who used morphine, cocaine,
as well as hashish in his “occult” experiments. De Guaita also cultivated eccentric habits
which drew attention to himself— he slept by day, only went out at night, his apartment
was draped in red and he usually dressed in robes of that color as well. (40) Certainly de
Guaita is most famous for having been accused of causing the death of Abbe Boullan by
magical assassination in 1893. This accusation was probably nothing more than paranoid
rumors. De Guaita himself denied it and on the contrary was on record in his book Serpent
of Genesis as condemning the Vintras sect and the Abbe Boullan as being “Satanic.”(41) In
the final analysis it seems we have nothing more than a paranoid fanatic and a drug deluded
aesthete playing a game of “you’re one too!”
In 1890 Peladan broke with de Guaita and subsequently founded his own independent
Rose-Croix Catholique — a break referred to as “the War of the Two Roses.” Peladan
adopted the Assyrian title and name “Sar Merodack”— King Marduk. He began to issue
mandates to the world — especially to the artistic and occult worlds — which was only
fitting his new-found stature as king. The Sar conjured a highly original and creative
synthesis of occultism and Catholic tradition. No matter how outre the Sar’s behaviors or
theories became he was unable and unwilling to put his fanatical Catholicism behind him. It
was his purpose “‘to restore the cult of the IDEAL’ through the depiction of Beauty and on
the basis of tradition.” Peladan’s Rose-Croix organization had widespread influence among
artists in Paris.
The Sar’s order did not survive his death in 1918. De Guaita died in 1898— blind and
shattered in body and mind— no doubt an end hastened by his brand of “pharmaceutical
occultism.” However, his order was continued by Gerard Encause (who wrote under the
name “Papus”) until his own death in 1917.
The Bohemian or Decadent artistic movement runs parallel to the occult revival taking
place in Europe during the same time period. As much as these aesthetes loathed the
modem age they were utterly the product of it and their “magic” was essentially a
modem— albeit a “Romantic” one. The Decadents, by using every artistic medium of
communication available to them, sought to undermine the positivistic, rational-materialism
which had come to dominate the upper levels of western civilization by the latter half of the
19th century. They, however, fought this battle on a field defined by the positivists— in
the world of the senses.
be Diable au XIXe Sieclei
Leo Taxil and the Anarchistic Art of Hoaxing
In the latter half of the 19th century, especially in France, the Devil lad become a figure
of enormous entertainment value, and a symbol of spiritual and political rebellion
(especially among fanatic or conservative Catholics). “Black Masses” were performed in
Paris as dramatic tourist attractions and the figure of the Devil — then as now — was
always good for the raising of sensationalistic expectations. But since the issuance of the
Syllabus of Errors in 1864 conservative Catholics also had a new impetus for considering
all forms of progressivism and change as essentially diabolical in origin.
Freemasonry had been especially identified by the church as a Satanic force. Pope Leo
XTTT in his encyclical Humanum genus (1879) claimed Freemasonry inteuded to overthrow
Christianity and re-establish paganism. A Jesuit Archbishop wrote La franc-maconnerie,
synagoge de Satan in which it was claimed that the Grand Master of the lodge in
Charleston, South Carolina was the Vicar of Satan and that it was the intention of Masonry
to destroy Christianity and establish a Satanic Empire. (42)
The two tendencies to see “Satanism” as both high entertainment and a serious threat to
the establishment were woven together in one of the most elaborate hoaxes in history— the
104
apparent purpose of which was the exposure and weakening of the conservative cause. The
means used for this operation were the popular press and popular literature on the subject
of Satanism. The ironic thing is that much of the literature created for this hoax — or
campaign of disinformation — or derivations from it, is still being used today in lurid
descriptions of supposed Satanic goings-on.
The master mind of the hoax was Gabriel Jogand-Pages, who wrote under the name
Leo Taxil (as well as Dr. Bataille). Jogand was bom in 1854 and began his education under
the Jesuits— but began to call himself a “freethinker” by the age of 14. He was exposed to
the ideas of Masonry through a book he obtained from a friend at school. His
rebelliousness eventually led him to try to run away to Italy— but as punishment of this he
was sent to a juvenile prison for eight months by his father. This incident was apparently
further fuel for his sense of rebellion against authority throughout his life.(43)
In 1870 he joined the military and served in Algeria. After this he began to publish anti¬
clerical and Republican journals in his native Marseille— for this he was convicted of, and
fined for, “blasphemy and outrages against religion.” But his journalistic subversion
continued nevertheless.
1878 saw his move to Paris where he founded radical journals of tremendous
popularity. By 1881 he actually joined a Freemasonic lodge. He spent a total of 12 months
in the brotherhood and must not have been very highly initiated— but by this time most
Masonic “secrets” were available to the learned public anyway. But after his departure he
“mysteriously” began to write exposes of the sinister secrets of Masonry and began to
make alliances with clerical forces. In 1887 he published The Confessions of a Freethinker
which won him an audience with Pope Leo XHL
‘Taxil” then proceeded to create and publish anti-clerical and anti-Catholic literature—
including periodicals ostensibly emanating from the Satanic “Palladium.” First he set about
fabricating the personality of Diana Vaughn— supposedly the descendant of a line going
back to a union between the English alchemist Thomas Vaughn and the goddess Astarte!
Diana Vaughn finished up her career as a fictional character when Arthur Macben borrowed
the name for a character in “The Great God Pan.”
While creating the artificial reality of the “Palladians” and their head “Diana Vaughn”
Taxil was also busy publishing exposes of the Satanic cult. In 1887 he claimed that Diana
Vaughn was now in hiding from the Palladists— but could not show herself for fear of
reprisals. He exhorted good Catholics to pray and have masses said for her conversion
from her religion of evil to the true Church. For ten more years Jogand/Taxil would exploit
this hoax. He had Diana finally “convert” to Roman Catholicism— and even had her
writing devotional literature which was praised by the Pope himself! In 1892 Jogand issued
his magnum opus under the name Dr. Bataille called Le Diable au XIXe Siecle. “Dr.
Bataille” was another alternate persona used by Jogand— sometimes to whip up the Satanic
scare, sometimes to decry it as a fraud. Jogand was, by the way, aided in his work by his
female secretary who in fact was the actual writer of some of the “Diana Vaughn”
material. (44)
Jogand/Taxil was indeed a magnificent sorcerer. He spun a web of mass illusion at the
highest ranks of society for well over a decade. But right after Easter 1897 he called down
the final curtain. Diana Vaughn was set to appear for the first time in person before an
audience gathered at the Geographic Society in Paris— but only Jogand appeared. He read
a statement to the crowd in which the whole hoax was laid out(45) He had made fools of
the masses in demonstrating that they were ready to believe the most outrageous neo-
medieval nonsense imaginable!
Although apologists would try to claim that all the revelations about the Satanic
Palladium, Masonry and all the rest were really true— and that Jogand had been “bought
off’ by the evil conspirators to “confess” that he had made it all up— an “explanation” that
even further stretches credibility — a more likely interpretation is that Jogand was
practicing a form of journalistic sorcery— and anarchy — at the expense of the Church and
105
the Masons both. He was just continuing his life-long rebellion against authority of all
kinds.
The story of 19th century French “satanism” is important to us because it sets the stage
for subsequent developments in the left-hand path in America in the late 20th century. The
interweaving of religiou and philosophy with art and entertainment would be a hallm ark of
the LaVeyan Satanism of the 1960s and 1970s. In the final analysis, however, there is little
in the world of French Decadence of the late 19th century which can be seen as furthering
the phil osophical aim s of left-hand path philosophies. Because they tended to hang onto
medieval imagery — conditioned by their thoroughly Catholic cultural milieu — the French
Satanists (of fact and fiction) actually seem to have retarded the renewal of the philosophy
of the Transcendental Branch of the Left-Hand Path in the west. But at the same time they
provided the heart and soul of the imagery upon which the redevelopment of the Immanent
Branch of the path would rest
The Red Devil
While the Satan of the Decadents and the Neo-Romantics was being manifested in the
world of the arts, another image of Satan was being revalued in the political sphere. The
Satan of Judeo-Christian tradition— as developed by Milton and the Romantics — was a
hi ghl y suitable symbol or embodiment of rebellion in the revolutionary period of the mid-
19th century. Even the materialist/positivist revolutionaries saw Satan as a hero of sorts.
Almost in a revival of the ancient debate between Epicureans and Stoics, the mid-19th
century saw the growth of a new form of materialism (which had been theoretically
pioneered by La Mettrie and de Sade) but which was now projected into the world of
economic and political action. In essence, however, the assertion that the material universe
is all that exists and any notion of a metaphysical realm is purely an aberration or delusion
is in and of itself a matter of faith in something unseen or unapparent Radical materialism
is in practice just as "‘mystical” as spiritualism, and history has shown that it is no more
“scientific” than theology and not nearly as effective.
The materialists of the 19th century were uniformly revolutionaries— intellectual as
well as political — rebels. They revolted against an establishment universally wrapped up
in the mantle of religious authority. God Almighty, King of Heaven, ruled there as the
Czar, Kaiser, or King ruled in Russia, Prussia, or England. It is therefore not surprising
that when and if their thoughts were couched in Biblical metaphors they might tend to show
an overwhelming amount of sympathy for the Devil.
Whether it was the communism of Marx, the anarchism of Bakunin, or the Bolshevism
of Lenin each had their special relationships with the Devil and each saw him as they saw
themselves— cast in the glow of a red light. In their minds the battle lines were drawn
between the spiritual and material, the bourgeois and proletariat the “haves” and the “have-
nots.”
The Devil and Karl Marx
For conservatives over the past century and a half or more the ideas of revolutionary
communism have been virtually synonymous with a cosmic Satanic conspiracy— from
Pope Pius IX to John Birch and beyond. Before these apparent ravings are dismissed out
of hand, we might find it interesting to explore the philosophies of Marx and other
socialist/materialist thinkers from a left-hand path viewpoint.
Karl Marx (1818-1883) did not invent communism or historical materialism, but he
was an original synthesizer and codifier of a range of philosophical, economic and socio¬
political ideas into a theoretically coherent whole. This ideology could then be more
forcefully disseminated than had been the case with the loose association of concepts that
marked related pre-Marxist movements.
Marx was bom in Trier, Germany on 5 May 1818 to an ethnically Jewish family.(46)
His father, Heinrich, had converted to Lutheranism just the year before. Karl was brought
up entirely in the Lutheran faith. In 1835 he went to study law at the university of Bonn,
but transferred to Berlin the following year where he was quickly “converted” to
106
philosophy under the influence of the “Young Hegelians,” a group of intellectuals engaged
in the t ransf ormation of Hegel’s historical idealism into historical materialism.
Marx had planned to become a university lecturer. He wrote his doctoral dissertation on
the philosophy of Epicureanism, But by 1841 the Prussian government clamped down on
the Hegelian left, which caused all job prospects for Marx to evaporate. Back in the
western part of Germany, in Saarbriicken, Marx met a communistic Zionist publicist named
Moses Hess who was able to “convert” him to a communist philosophy. Hess was also
responsible for converting Friedrich Engels, Marx’ future collaborator. Marx soon became
the editor of a liberal newspaper, the Rheinische Zeitung , which he quickly radicalized. In
April 1843, the paper was suppressed by the government and Marx emigrated to Paris. He
was expelled from France in 1845, eventually settling in England in 1849. The year before,
in 1848, he wrote one of his two major works — in collaboration with Engels — The
Manifesto of the Communist Party. He was to live the rest of his life in relatively obscure
circumstances in London.
In 1864 the “First International” — or more precisely the International Workingman’s
Association — was organized in London. This was a federation of unions and radical
organizations. Marx was able to exert his influence on this group. In place of nationally
organized and loosely affiliated, vaguely liberal unions, Marx imposed his vision of an
international, disciplined and federated, radical organization bent ou the utter destruction of
capitalist society. Because of his authoritarian principles Marx was opposed in the
International by the almost equally prestigious Mikail Bakunin.
1867 saw the publication of the first volume of Marx’ magnum opus : Capital (Das
Kapital). By this time his thought had reached its full maturity and he could only defend the
doctrines he had already developed. His support for the short-lived violently insurgent
government in France in 1871, known as ‘"the Commune,” earned for Marx the popular
title of “the Red Terrorist Doctor ”
Due largely to the chaotic influence of Bakunin in the organization, the International
died in obscurity in Philadelphia in 1876. In his latter years Marx developed closer ties with
Russian communists. But before these ties could be exploited, he died in London on 14
March 1883. He is buried in Highgate Cemetery. It would be over three decades before his
theories would begin to be put into practical use after the Russian revolution of 1917.
Marx’ attitude toward traditional religion was that it is “the opiate of the masses.”
However, it is equally clear that he intended his philosophy to be a total replacement for
religion. His antipathy toward religion began shortly after he began his university studies.
He and his associates at the Doktorldub — the Young Hegelians of Beilin — set out on an
atheistic program to destroy the superstructure of conservative authority, which they saw in
religion. Although he later concentrated on certain economic theories coupled with
historical materialism, the young Marx had a vision of the ‘Total redemption of
humanity,”(47) as he wrote in the introductiou to his Contribution to the Critique of
HegeVs Philosophy of Right (1844). The whole of Marx’ philosophy has been seen as a
sort of “prophetic politics”(48) in which a total transformation of the world is envisioned—
and then promoted.
The early ideas of Marx — in which the roots of his motivations may be found — have
been analyzed as being Faustian/Promethean by at least one scholar.(49) Even the casual
observer will have noticed the quasi-religious features of Marxism both as a theory and as it
has been practiced in various countries in the 20th century. This perhaps has its origins in
the nature of Marx’ own initial impetus during his Berlin period. All this is best revealed in
his own early, pre-communist, writings, e.g. the epic drama Oulanem (1837) and his
poetry. In one of these poems, “The Fiddler” [“Der Spielmann ,r \ (1841), he writes:
107
Was, was! Ich stech’, stech’ ohne fehle
Blutschwarz den Sabel in Deine Seele,
Gott kennt sie nicht, Gott acht’ nicht der Kunst
Die stieg in den Kopf axis Hdllendunst,
Bis das Him vemarrt, bis das Herz verwandelt:
Die hab’ ich lebendig vom Schwarzen erhandelt
Der schlagt mir den Takt, der kreidet die Zeichen;
muss voller, toller den Todtenmarsch streichen...
(11. 17-24)
Behold, my blood-blackened saber shall stab
Without fail into your heart
God neither knows nor does he honor art.
It rises into the brain as vapors from HelL
Until I brain is deluded and my heart transformed:
I bought it while still alive from the Dark-One.
He beats the time for me, he gives the signs;
must more boldly, madly rush in the March of Death...
It is curious that even toward the end of his life overtly Satanic images were used to
describe him, even by his close associates. His son-in-law Paul Lafargue said of him: "...
he himself was known as the Moor or Old Nick on account of his dark complexion and
sinister appearance.”(50)
In the final analysis Marxism is a system of mystical materialism. He posits that history
has an organic structure and that its evolution is driven not by the mind of God, as Hegel
would have had it, but by exclusively material considerations, e.g. purely economic
determination or human behavior and the change caused by struggles between economically
determined classes in society. Throughout all of history classes of people — as determined
essentially by economic status — who were without power would, by the inevitable force
of the historical dialectic, wrest power away from those who have it at present. Thus the
proletariat would, by the sheer force of history, overcome the over-ripe capitalist
establishment.
Marx claimed that his theories were purely “scientific” or rationally based, that he
merely had the clearest view of historical change and its causes. But as it turns out his work
had an effect less like a prophesy and more like a soicerous incantation. Essentially Marx’
view of history appears uncannily like that of Judeo-Christian tradition— only its causal
agent has been [evaluated from “God’s Plan” to “historical dialectic.” In the former there is
an initial Edenic period, broken by man’s transgression against God’s law. This is
followed by a long period of tribulation ended first by the incarnation of the Messiah who
brings the program for salvation — the Evangelium—which is to be enacted by his earthly
followers (the Church). Once this program has been spread world-wide, evil will be van¬
quished and a new paradise will be established on earth. The Christian version of this is, of
course, highly spiritualized, while the Judaic remains largely materialistic. The Marxist
view similarly posits an early period of primitive communism, broken by the institution of
private property (= Original Sin) and slave labor. This is followed by successive economic
stages of feudalism and capitalism. The beginning of the end of the capitalistic phase is
heralded by Marxist theory as a program for “redemption” — historical dialectic — which
is to be enacted by socialist revolutionaries (the International). Once revolution is spread
world-wide, capitalism will be vanquished and the classless, perfected Communist society
will be established on earth. Such parallels between Marxist and Christian and/or Judaic
views of history have also been posited by several scholars in the past(51)
Although Marxist theory may be increasingly discredited as political systems based
upon it fail and prove to be programs for ever more inefficient and intolerant systems than
those the theory was designed to overthrow, elements of Marxist thinking have definitely
108
permeated into popular political culture in the form of such things as notions of “political
correctness.” The concept of “political correctness” (even the connotations of the phrase)
stems from Marxist orthodoxy and is based on the premise that there is an ongoing struggle
by a variety of suppressed groups who are at present viewed as being relatively powerless,
e.g. women, African Americans, Hispanics, the physically challenged. It is their collective
aim (each group individually) to wrest socioeconomic power from those who have it at
present This is Marx’ “class struggle.” Furthermore, those groups are assured by Marxist
theory of fighting the good fight the moral fight, because the historical dialectic (or the
Marxist “God”) is on their side. Their morality and their future victory is assured by the
very fact that they are currently powerless. This is why, for example, blacks cannot be
considered “racists ” or womeu “sexists ” at least according to this theory based in the
Marxist historical dialectic.
— The Anarchistic Devil —
“If God really existed it would be necessary to abolish him.”
- Mikail Bakunin
In his fragmentary work, God and the State , the Russian anarchist Michael Bakunin
(1814-1876) at one point assesses humanity in terms of the Edenic myth and says: “[Satan]
makes man ashamed of his bestial ignorance and obedience; he emancipates him, stamps
upon his brow the seal of liberty and humanity, in urging him to disobey and eat of the fruit
of knowledge.”(52) As Bakunin saw it, humanity — as an essentially bestial creature —
was “endowed in a higher degree than the animals of any other species with two precious
faculties— the power to think and the desire to rebel.” His understanding of humanity—
his anthropology — held that collectively and individually the development of man was
characterized by three principles: human animality , thought and rebellion.
For Bakunin Satan is “the eternal rebel, the first freethinker and emancipator of
worlds.”(53) Like most anarchists who derive much of their theory from Roussseau’s idea
of the “noble savage,” civilization and its institutions are the chief evils in the world. They
must be struck down so that the innate nobility of humanity may emerge as a matter of
natural course once freed of all socially determined conventions.
Bakunin was himself more an activist revolutionary than a writer or philosopher— he
said “I have no system, I am a seeker.” He is said to have had a love for the mysterious and
the irrational. This put him at odds with those he called “doctrinaire communists” who
followed the more systematic philosophy of Marx. Both of these philosophies are,
however, based on a positivistic materialism. “God” was firmly identified with the idea of
“spirit,” so the Devil, God’s opposite, must be — if we choose to use this language —
tantamount to the idea of matter. The property of “intelligence” can be ascribed to matter
due to its “dynamic nature and evolutionary quality ” according to Bakunin.(54)
This dichotomizing of “matter” and “spirit” (or “intelligence”) is, of course, typical of
the modem era. Where such dichotomies can be generated one must be accepted, the other
rejected, or so goes conventional thought All this is modem, all-too-modem. From a left-
hand path perspective it is perhaps interesting to remember that ancient Hebrew mythology
identified as “Satanic” both the existence of the flesh (nature/matter) and the presence of
intelligence (as a result of rebellion).
While the ideas of Bakunin lived on in a vague obscurity — and continue to do so
today among all those who oppose authority in all its forms — the ideas of Marx have had
a much more doctrinaire and institutionalized history. This history was to be played out not
in the industrialized capitalist strongholds of western Europe but in the still largely
feudalists, pre-industrial Russia.
The Bolsheviks and the “Empire of Evil”
The Slavs in general, and the Russians in particular, have a special place in their
national traditions for the Devil or devils. Russian popular religion on the very eve of the
1917 Revolution was still a mixture of orthodoxy and rural demonology(55) — there was
indeed still a true “dual faith” (Rus. dvoeverie ). This only goes to show how
109
extraordinarily conservative (in the sense of holding onto archaic cultural traditions) the
Russian peasant was. The structure of this faith remained virtually unchanged from the
period of the conversion of the Russians to Orthodoxy nine centuries before.
But beside the “normal” culturally conservative peasants who believed in the magical
power of saints (who embodied their old Slavic gods) and the powers of devils great and
small, there was a variety of extraordinary sects or cults in late 19th and early 20th century
Russia which must be understood in order to comprehend the spiritual dimension of the
phenomenon of Bolshevism.
Most of these sects rejected orthodox spirituality in favor of their own teachings many
of which were heavily tinged with Gnosticism and most of which held out the promise of
the advent of an earthly paradise— as opposed to the more orthodox promise of a heavenly
one. Many of these sects were rationalistic and materialistic in their ideas and prophesied a
time when mankind — as a collective entity — would become god-like. Sects such as the
Raskolnik, the Molokans, Duchohorzis, Stundists, Neo-Stundists, the Nyemolyaki (non-
prayers), Medalyshchiki and Nyeplatelshchiki (non-tax-payers) and several others all
taught of the evils of private property and the Russian Orthodox Church. They were for the
universal brotherhood of humanity, the advent of an earthly paradise in the name of true
Christianity. They were against the privilege of private property, the Orthodox Church—
and Satan.(56)
Other, perhaps better known, sects in Russia at this time include the Khlysti
(“whippers”) and the Skoptsi (“mutilated”) who grew out of them. The Khlysti practiced a
libertine form of mysticism which involved flagellation and sexual orgies. The Skoptsi,
however, believed in extreme asceticism and practices of corporeal mortification—
including mutilation of the sexual organs and amputation of limbs. Their leader was
typically believed to be the reincarnation of Christ— and sometimes the Czar would
“humor” them by crucifying them on the Kremlin wall!(57) These sects compare very
favorably with tendencies present in Gnostic cults from the first few centuries of the
Common Era. (58)
It seems likely that the famous rogue holy-man, Grigori Y. Rasputin, was closely allied
with the teachings of the Khlysti— at least in spirit However, most hard evidence — such
as his own writings — points to him being a rather naive, simple peasant in most of his
outlook on life. Surely he was no follower of the left-hand path.(59) This despite the fact
that he is listed as one of the major influences on Anton LaVey on die dedication page of
the Satanic Bible and despite the popular image of him as a “devil worshipper.” Often the
myth, or image , of a man in history far outweighs any factual data on him.
It is into this mixture of widespread popular demonology, sects preaching the advent of
“heaven on earth” and cults practicing extreme forms of libertinage and asceticism that the
Bolsheviks of V. L Lenin step upon the stage of Russian history.
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (1870-1924) founded the Bolshevik (majority members) faction
of the Russian Social-Democratic Workers’ party in London in 1903. This wing opposed
the Menshevik (minority members) faction. Lenin, bom Ulyanov, became a Marxist
revolutionary after the execution of his brother who was implicated in a plot to assassinate
the Czar. Lenin was later arrested and sent to Siberia in 1895. In 1900 he fled to western
Europe to organize socialism internationally. In 1905 he returned to Russia to participate in
the abortive revolution of that year, but fled again in 1907. Lenin returned to Russia after
the outbreak of the 1917 revolution in March of that year— and led the Bolshevik
overthrow of the provisional government in November (October in the old style Russian
calendar). As chairman of the Council of People’s Commissars he became the virtual
dictator of Russia. From then to his death in 1924 Lenin worked to establish the
professional revolutionaries of the Bolshevik party as the ruling elite of the country, while
suppressing all internal opposition to himself and working to spread communist revolution
world-wide. One of his closest associates was Joseph Stalin.
110
Lenin’s opponents often saw in him the Antichrist(60) Certainly he was an
“apocalyptic” figure who attempted to transform a whole culture in a very short period of
time. He was as successful as he was because of his mystical vision of a primitive culture
transformed into an ultra-modem, electrified, totally efficient machine. The Machine was
Lenin’s god.
Each individual worker or peasant — each individual human being — was essentially a
machine, and so too was the collective entity of all workers and peasants. Lenin’s inner
task was to make the whole work as an efficient, perfected machine. This is why science
and technology were virtually sanctified in Soviet Russia. The New Man, the New
Machine — the Homo Sovieticus — would be created from the scientific communist
programs of the Bolsheviks. These programs were indeed set into motion by the party.
These activities amounted to the dismantlement of orthodox religion replaced by the new
faith of Communism.
The Rites and Rituals of Bolshevism
No source informs us more about the early cultural history of Soviet Russia then
FulopMiller’s Face and Mind of Bolshevism (1926). We can expect more internal
evidence to surface in the coming years about the quasi-religious and even “magical”
aspects of Soviet culture. It is clear that the early Bolsheviks had an extremely radical
“plan ” implicit in the Marxist-Leninist philosophy, for the transformation of the human
species into a collective god-like machine. But how was this to be done in practical terms?
First, the vestiges of the old system, the bourgeois society and culture, had to be destroyed
utterly. As institutions the church and state could be eradicated or controlled in a relatively
easy manner— through brute force. But the psychological and cultural (collective
psychological) hold of the old ways would require a second phase: the institution of new
cultural and quasi-religious forms to replace the old ones.
Plate 6.1: Comic Icon from Bezbozhnik
In the efforts of the first phase the communist youth organizations, especially the
Komsomol-League , were instrumental. There were massive campaigns to debunk the
Russian Orthodox religion and every cultural aspect of that church. The public was
rationally “educated” against belief in icons or the miraculous powers of relics of the saints.
In the former effort, for example, comic versions of icons were produced in magazines
such as Bezbozhnik (“The Atheist'), an example of which is reproduced on plate 6.1.
“Red Masses” were held in the old churches. These lampooned the orthodox faith with
comic mockeries of their ceremonies. Churches were turned into museums of atheism and
the h amm er and sickle replaced the saltire cross atop the spires. Belief in the curative
powers of the miraculously preserved bodies of saints was debunked with rational and
scientific explanations of how the bodies were preserved by artificial means. It is rather
ironic, but consistent with the nature of cultural continuity, that Lenin’s body was
preserved the way it was— as a miraculous example of “Soviet Sainthood.”
Soon after the revolutions of 1917 the Soviets set out to create a replacement for the
“opiate of the masses.” The negative campaign against religion in general could only take
them so far in transforming the society. Certain rites and customs were created in the time
of Lenin to act as positive answers to the human need for such things. There were rites for
“baptism,” marriage and funeral.
The most interesting of these is that of the baptism, or naming of a new “comrade.” The
names given to children were sometimes selected by collective action in the factory or party
offices. A whole new type of names began being given in Russia— ones that reflected
Revolutionary values, e.g. Revolutia or Oktyabrina (in honor of the “October” revolution)
for girls and things such as Rem (an acronym for the Russian phrase for “Revolutionary
Electrification Program”) for boys. The naming was done in a “Red Baptism” presided
over by local party secretaries in party facilities. Usually children were named in group
ceremonies. The meeting hall was draped in red, the gathered workers sang “The
International ” hymn of international communism, and the parents swore to bring up the
child as a good communist The official n amin g was done ceremonially with the words:
We the undersigned herewith confirm that into the
union of the Socialist Soviet Republic a new
citizen . _(here the first and last
names are inserted) has been received. As it is
that we give to you your name in honor of
_(here an explanation of the
socialist significance of the first name is
given), we greet you as a future worker and
founder of Communist society. May the ideals of
Communism henceforth form the content of your
long-lasting life! May you become one of those who
will lead the great task of the proletariat to its
conclusion! You shall step beneath the red flag!
Long live the new revolutionary citizen! (61)
The Soviets thought that the new, younger generation would be the true transformers of
humanity. Instrumental in this transformation of the species would be a new sexual
morality. Until the advent of Stalinism there was a red sexual revolution following in the
wake of the political revolution. Both marriage and divorce were made easier— with no
involvement with ecclesiastical sacraments. Abortions were also easily available, but not
encouraged. Certain aspects of the new red sexuality suggest possible links with the
Khlysti sect— at least in spirit
112
In Pravda a female ideologue, Smidovich, published an article on this new morality
pertaining especially to the young members of the Komsomol. She wrote that the more
primitive (“ animalis tic”) the rules of conduct for sexual life are, the more Communistic they
are. The youth must not place restrictions on their sexuality. No female should refuse the
sexual advances of a male member of the Komsomol. In the Komsomol itself orgies, called
“African Nights” were organized in which there were approximately 70 percent men and 30
percent women.(62)
These institutions did not survive the development of StalinisnL
Lenin only lived to 1924— at which time Joseph Stalin (179-1953) began to
consolidate his power from his position as General Secretary of the Communist Party. By
1929, with the exile of Leon Trotsky, Stalin’s hold on ideological power was complete.
Stalin reinstated a high level of cultural conservatism and virtually every shred of the avant
garde characteristics of the Revolution was suppressed. To his citizens Stalin became a
devil incarnate perhaps liquidating as many of his countrymen as were killed in the “Great
Patriotic War” with the Germans. Any and all popular deviations from the strict,
atheistically puritanical code of Stalinist authoritarianism became impossible.
The demise of the Soviet system in the early 1990s indicates nothing more than the
failure of one more totalitarian regime to sustain the common welfare. The theoretically
Maixist-Leninist line of thought was utterly (if covertly) rejected by Stalin during his tenure
as Soviet dictator. For all intents and purposes the Marxist-Leninist experiment died in the
Stalinist purges. What replaced it was the ever-popular form of simple tyranny.
From a left-hand path perspective there are essentially two kinds of political structures.
One is the tyrannical structure in which the leader is virtually deified (or demonized) and
worshipped. In such a structure the only possible practitioner of the left-hand paih would
be the leader him- or herself— all others would have to practice the right-hand path value
system of self- ann i hilati on before the will of the leader. The second left-hand path political
structure involves the relative deification of a variety of individuals in various spheres of
influence. With each individual epicenter of consciousness on the perimeter of other
surrounding spheres.
Both structures have their representatives. The latter structure is more complex and
subtle, of course. It is seen in the models of pagan antiquity (whether that of the national
traditions, Indian tantrism, or Platonic systems) and in modem organizations such as the
Temple of Set The former mode is more evident in modem movements of ideological or
political totalitarianism where the leader understands himself to be the universal “god” — or
standard — of the “world” in which he reigns. This is usual in many occult organizations.
This is often the case among modem Satanic groups such as the Church of Satan in which
the personality of Anton LaVey defined its essence in toto.
The question as to the true left-hand path significance of Marxist theory and practice is
fairly clear. Theoretically, Marxism assumes a possible perfection (deification) of humanity
as a species . But this perfection is only possible on a collective, uot individualized, basis.
The nature of this collective is determined by materialistic/economic criteria and the process
of perfection is governed by a transpersonal force in history. That the human can become
(a) god is essentially a left-hand path premise, but that the process by which this occurs is
collective and not willed (but inevitable) takes the ideology out of any ultimate
consideration as a left-hand path system. Plato or Pythagoras would have told Marx that
any deification must be based on individuality. It is perhaps this truth that Lenin and Stalin
realized in their final stages of personal development
“Collective perfection” is a notion inherited from Judaic and perhaps Iranian ideology.
The idea that a selected group of humans will gain knowledge, power and immortality
passes into institutionalized Christianity and can be found in “political” ideologies such as
Marxism or National Socialism. Such ideologies are always dependent on linear models of
history— the group as a whole must progress through time until the advent of collective
perfection (or “salvation”). For the National Socialist (Nazi) or Jew (from whom the Nazi
113
derived the idea) the collective is deified in terms of an ethnic group. For the Marxist or
Christian the collective is determined on a more voluntary, ethical, basis. But it is also
somehow “predestined” (by historical dialectic here, by “God’s Plan” there). A
comprehensive analysis of “Satanic politics” still awaits some future investigator.
— The Will to Power —
Nietzsche: the Antichrist
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) is a philosopher with a sinister reputation. For the
most part this is because Hitler is supposed to have liked him. This is also why Richard
Wagner is an “evil composer.” If they were capable of perceiving the truth, the popular
pundits responsible for such ludicrous reasoning would have much more to fear from both
of these men than even they can imagine.
Nietzsche’s objectively productive period spanned from 1972, when Birth of Tragedy
was published, to 1889 when he becomes either insane or divine. (After this time he
referred to himself with a variety of “divine epithets” including Dionysius, “the Crucified
and Apollo.) Among his last works was The Antichrist(6 3) which was a full-force frontal
attack on Christianity. In an early section of that book, he writes:
What is good? Everything that heightens the feeling of power in man, the
will to power, power itself.
What is bad? Everything that is bom of weakness.
What is happiness? The feeling that power is growing , that resistance is
overcome. Not contentedness but more power, not peace but war, not but
fituess (Renaissance virtue, virtu, virtue that is moraline-free).
The weak and the failures will perish: first principle of our love of man.
And they shall be given every possible assistance.
What is more harmful than any vice? Active pity for all the failures and all
the weak: Christianity.
The comprehensive philosophy of Nietzsche is too complex to discuss extensively in
this forum. His cosmology was an entirely materialistic one, and his view of man one that
would be closely imitated by Anton LaVey. Man’s only distinction from “other animals” is
his ability to build “horizons”— to overcome limitations imposed upon him and which he
imposes on himself.
Most mysterious of Nietzsche’s ideas is his doctrine of Eternal Recurrence— ewige
Wiederkehr.(64) It was this idea which he him self thought was the essence of his teaching.
Three ideas — the Will to Power, the Overman and Eternal Recurrence — are bound
together in a Mysterious triad. Recurrence is the law. Will is the method and the Overman
the ahn.
Nietzsche saw him self, and those who would understand him, as “Hyperboreans” —
those of the ultimate north — ones separated from the rest of humanity by their characters.
They are to be Obermenschen — “over-men,” those who have “overcome by going-under”
(See Thus Spoke Zarathustra Prologue 1.) Nietzsche’s philosophy is based on the force of
the empowerment of the individual Will, or consciousness. It is a philosophy of
Diesseitigkeit — “this-sided-ness.” It is the individual, carnal ego which is to empower its
will in order to become the Ubermensch. This evolution into the Overman — tins “self¬
deification” — takes place under the direction of the Will. Essential to the technique of
Nietzsche’s active philosophy is the Umwertung alter Werte : “the Revaluation of all
Values.” This virtually defines a modem school of secular antinomianism instituted for the
sake of the evolution of the Will into a unique and potent entity.
Obviously many of Nietzsche’s ideas correspond to the philosophy of the left-hand
path. That which seems to be lacking is a theory of “magic” and a system of “initiation.”
But his ideas were to be developed in this direction by such magical philosophers as
114
Aleister Crowley (who seems to have based his philosophy on Nietzsche's Will to Power),
P. D. Ouspensky, Gregor A. Gregorius and Anton LaVey.
From the time of the Renaissance, the dawn of the Modem Age, there has been a steady
development toward secularization, rationalism, and even materialism within the
establishment of western culture. This has manifested itself in everything from the growth
of free-trade capitalism, to representational democracy, to “secular humanism ” to Marxist
political theory. But at the same time during the course of the most recent and accelerated
phase of modernism (from about 1880 to the present) there has been a growing “occult
revival” running below the surface of established norms. In this counter-cultural
phenomenon the keys to the current manifestations of the left-hand path can be found. It
will be found too that these keys help unlock many mysteries housed in the establishment
culture which were in many cases spawned from intersections of modernist rationalism and
occultist magic and mysticism.
115
Notes for Chapter 6
(I) The so-called Children’s Crusade occurred in 1212 CE and involved the rounding up of thousands of
children to be sent to “fight” in the Holy Land (they would be invulnerable in battle because of their
innocence). Merchants hired to transport the boys and girls took them from Marseille to Alexandria, where
they were sold into slavery.
(2) On the revival of paganism in the Renaissance, see Jean Seznec, The Survival of the Pagan Gad
(New York: Harper and Row, 1953).
(3) W illiam Flemin g, Arts and Ideas (New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1986, 7th ed.), pp. 221-
223.
(4) Printed by Ernst Cassierer, et al. eds. The Renaissance Philosophy of Man (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1948), pp. 193-212.
(5) See Cassierer, The Renaissance Philosophy of Man, pp. 223-254.
(6) Cassierer, The Renaissance Philosophy of Man, p. 225,
(7) Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince . trans. T. G. Bergin. (Arlington Heights, DL: Harlan Davidson,
1947), p. 50.
(8) Eric Towers, Dashwood: The Man and the Myth (Wellingborough, UK: Crucible, 1986), pp. 13-
21; 231-246.
(9) Mark Blackett-Ord, Hell-Fire Duke: The Life of the Duke of Wharton (Windsor Forest, UK: Kensal
Press, 1982), p. 46.
(10) Blackett-Ord, Hell-Fire Duke , pp. 44ff.
(II) Towers, pp. 130-131)
(12) Towers, Dashwood, p. 148.
(13) Towers, Dashwood, pp. 219-220.
(14) Towers Dashwood, pp. 160ff.
(15) Towers, Dashwood, p. 146.
(16) Thomas Jefferson, The Life and Morals of Jesus ofNazareth [ = The Jefferson Bible ] (St Louis: N.
D. Thompson, 1902).
(17) Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus, 1984. [1794-1795]).
(18) Paine, Age of Reason, p. 15.
(19) See Jean Paulhan’s introduction to The Marquis de Sade: The Complete Justine, Philosophy in the
Bedroom (New York: Grove, 1966), pp. 8-11.
(20) Geoffrey Gorer, The life and Ideas of the Marquis de Sade (London: Peter Owen, 1953,2nd ed.),
pp. 89-96.
(21) De Sade, Philosophy in the Bedroom, pp. 211-212.
(22) Marquis de Sade, Juliette (New York: Grove, 1968), pp. 765-798.
(23) For a discussion of tins passage see Gorer, Life and ideas of the Marquis de Sade , p. 180.
(24) See Gorer, life and Ideas of the Marquis de Sade, p. 171-185.
(25) Gorer, Life and Ideas of the Marquis de Sade , p. 187.
(26) R-M. S. Heffner, et aL eds, Goethe's Faust (Lexington, MA: Heath, 1954), p. 31.
(27) Heffner, Goethe's Faust , p. 30.
(28) Heffner, Goethe's Faust , p. 31.
(29) Heffner, Goethe's Faust , p. 31.
(30) See F.mma Jung, The Grail Legend (Boston: Sigo, 1986), pp. 150-151.
(31) Jean-Jacques Rousseau, The Confessions (New York: Colonial, 1935).
(32) Jeffery B. Russell, Mephistopheles (Itbica, NY: Cornell University Press, 1986), pp. 168-213.
(33) June Singer, The Unholy Bible (New York: Putnam, 1970).
(34) James Webb, The Occult Underground (La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1974), p. 163.
(35) Henry T.F. Rhodes, The Satanic Mass (Secaucus, NJ: Citadel, [1954]), pp. 156-US.
(36) Rhodes, Satanic Mass , p. 164.
(37) Webb, Underground, p. 141-144.
(38) Webb, Underground, p. 156.
(39) Webb, Underground, p. 169.
116
(40) Webb, Underground, pp. 173-174.
(41) Rhodes, Satanic Mass, p. 169.
(42) Webb, Underground, p. 144.
(43) Rhodes, Satanic Mass, pp. 194 ft
(44) Rhodes, Satanic Mass , p. 212.
(45) Rhodes, Satanic Mass, pp. 209-213.
(46) Isiab, Berlin, Karl Marx (Oxford; Oxford University Press, 1963), p. 21-22.
(47) Neal Riemer, Karl Marx and Prophetic Politics (New York; Praeger, 1987), p. 64.
(48) See Riemer, Karl Marx and Prophetic Politics, 1-20.
(49) Leszek Kolakowski, Main Currents of Marxism: 1: The Founders. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1981), pp. 409; 412; 414.
(50) Berlin, Karl Marx, p. 229.
(51) Riemer, Karl Marx and Prophetic Politics, p. 11-12.
(52) Michael Bakunin, God and the State (New York: Dover, 1970), p. 10.
(53) Bakunin, God and the State , p. 10.
(54) Bakunin, God and the State, pp. 12-13.
(55) Sergei M. Kravchinsky, The Russian Peasantry: Their Agrarian Condition, Social Life, and
Religion. Westport, CT: Hyperion, 1977 [1888], pp. 57-71.)
(56) Rend Fulop-Miller, The Mind and Face of Bolshevism (London; Putnam, 1927), pp. 100-121.
(57) These are reviewed by FulOp-Miller, The Mind and Face of Bolshevism in a chapter on
secterianism. See also the lurid account by Charles Lefebure, The Blood Cults (New York: Ace, 1969), pp.
100-105.
(58) Benjamin Walker, Gnosticism (Wellingborough, UK: Aquarian, 1983), p. 183-184.
(59) See Colin Wilson, Rasputin (Secaucus, NJ: Citadel, 1964).
(60) Fulop-Miller, Mind and Face of Bolshevism, p. 29.
(61) Fulop-Miller, Mind and Face ofBolshevismpp. 258-259.
(62) Fiilop-Miller, Mind and Face of Bolshevism, pp. 265-266.
(63) Walter Kaufman , The Portable Nietzsche (New York; Viking, 1954), pp. 565-656.
(64) Walter Kaufman, Nietzsche (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974), pp. 307-333.
117
Chapter 7
An Interlude in the Absolute Elsewhere:
Adolf Hitler and the Modern Mythologizing of Evil
In western culture during this latter pan of the 20th century no otter man is personally
more identified with the idea of evil than Adolf Hitler, no symbol more emblematic of evil
than the swastika, and no organized body of men more vilified than the “Nazis.” In fact it
often seems as if Hitler has replaced Satan as the very image of evil in our popular culture.
This, to be sure, is in the great historical sweep of things nothing but a passing fad, but it is
a present collectively subjective reality.
The origin of this image lies in war-time propaganda produced during and just at the
close of the Second World War. Books such as Lewis Spence’s The Occult Causes of the
Present War make claims such as: “From the first Germany has been a region favorable to
the suggestions of the powers of eviL” (p. 20) Spence goes on to write chapters with titles
such as “The Satanic Element in Nazism,” “The Satanic Power in Old Germany ” “The
Satanic Power in Modem Germany,” and “Nazism and Satanism.” Each chapter contains
assertions whose shrillness is exceeded only by their vagueness and obscurity— few
written or verifiable sources are ever cited for Spence’s information about the Satanic
Church that has supposed to have been in control of Germany since time immemorial. But
after all none is needed because the work is a work of pure war-time propaganda.
A whole modem mythology of “Nazi Occultism” grew up in the years after the war.
This mythology had as its common denominator that the National Socialists were somehow
really and truly in cahoots with the Devil in one guise or another and involved in all manner
of occult goings on.
The “occult classic” of the 1960s Le matin du magiciens (translated into English as The
Morning of the Magicians ) by Louis Pauwels and Jacques Bergier set things in motion with
a chapter entitled “A Few years in the Absolute Elsewhere.” The contents of this chapter
can best, and most charitably be described as an effort in modem mythologizing. Few
objective facts are present
Then in the early 1970s a writer named Trevor Ravenscroft wrote a book entitled The
Spear of Destiny, which was largely based on the ideas of his teacher Walter Johannes
Stein. In an apparently learned style Ravenscroft weaves a tale of reincarnation and evil in
which Adolf Hitler is the reincarnation of a historical personage, Landulf n, who was in
turn the figure upon whom the character of Clinschor/Klingsor was based in the
Parzival/Parsifal legend. The Spear of Destiny, it seems is supposedly the spear used by
Longinus to pierce die side of Jesus as he hung on the cross. Because this spear thrust was
necessary to fulfill biblical prophesies concerning the divinity of Jesus, it is said that
Longinus held the fate of the world in his hands with that spear. So too will any man who
holds the spear. It is a talisman of world power. Hitler saw it in its home in the Hofburg in
Vienna, and had it brought to Germany after the annexation of Austria by Germany in
1936. Indeed, this spear has many legends attached to it Including perhaps that of
Longinus. However, it can not have been that spear in fact. The spear in question is not of
119
Roman origin, in fact it was not made until around 700 AD, and is certainly of Longobardic
manufacture. (The spear was the royal scepter of the Germanic kings, and the symbolic
magical weapon of their high god, Woden.)
Ravenscroft, and perhaps Stein, are shown to have created ‘Tacts” out of thin air on
many occasions.(l) The Spear of Destiny, to put it as charitably as possible, is a work of
“poetic” history and/or cosmic propaganda. But its story seemed so compelling that is
spawned a whole new wave of “occult Nazi” books, such as The Occult Reich (1974), The
Occult and the Third Reich (1974) and Satan and Swastika (1976).
Each of these works has some pet theory to espouse as to just why and how the Nazis
were mixed up with “dark forces.” The only work to make any sense of this period is
Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke’s study The Occult Roots of Nazism. Its only somewhat occult
concept is a thinly disguised Marxist theoretical base, but that does not obstruct the facts
nearly so markedly as the theories abounding in the other works.
The Facts Behind the Mythos
But why, if the Nazis were not actually involved in the Satanic affairs the propagandists
and popularizing occult writers would have you believe, is such mythologizing so
appealing and why does it continue to “sell” so well? One of the reasons is that the Nazis
did play the role of villains so well— at least as villains were supposed to appear to the
Anglo-American world. They wore austere uniforms and had great rituals and indulged in
celebrations of vital existence— and were just all very intense. To argue that their practice
of exterminating whole populations somehow made them “diabolical” in any traditional
sense is absurd. Otherwise we would also have to classify the Roman Catholic Church as
being equally “diabolical.” That the acts of the Nazis were somehow historically unique is
equally absurd— the Stalinists, the Ethiopian Communists, the Khemer Rouge and dozens
of other parties, factions and states have carried out similar programs in this century alone.
No, there is some thin g archetypal about the style of the Nazis that makes them so
singular. This is then combined with a philosophy which is a curious mixture of the
barbaric, the medieval Christian and the futuristic scientific to give rise to an image which is
singularly out of step with the norms of the 20th century.
Nazi Irrationalism and Paganism
Although among the top Nazi leaders only Himmler and Rudolf Hess ever resigned
from their Christian Church affiliations, it is widely believed that the Nazis were heavily
involved in neo-Germanic religion (tantamount to diabolism in orthodox Christian circles).
This was not really the case.
For many decades Germany had been swept up in a neo-Roman tic fever for things
Germanic. Wagner’s operas, especially the Ring of the Nibelung tetralogy and Parsifal ,
were the rage, Guido von list and others had instituted a new runic mysticism,(2) neo-
Germanic religious and cultural groups were springing up all over Germany and Austria
from the late 19th through the early 20th century. (3)
The fact is the God of Hitler was not Satan or Wotan. When Hitler spoke of his own
religious conceptions he spoke entirely in terms of a Christian God (as he understood it).
All of Hitler’s expressions concerning religion have been collected by Manfred Ach and
Clemens Pentrop in their book Hitlers Religion (1977). He tolerated — and used — the
widespread neo-heathenism in Germany because he thought it provided “unrest” in the
populace— unrest which he could use to his own ends. "... These professors and obscure
men who found their Nordic religions corrupt the whole thing for me.” (4) This is the
documented reality of the personal attitude of Hitler toward neo-heathen religion. He could
hardly be called a Satanist or Wotanist!
As we will see later, the Nazis attempted to institutionalize a new religion based on
Party doctrines and given shape by religious and magical pageantry with symbolism drawn
from the established churches, but also from Imperial Rome and what they knew of ancient
120
Germanic cult. It appears that the deeper into the core of the Nazi hierarchy one went the
more “pagan” or “magical” things became.
Nazi Medievalism and Science
But the motivating factors for the Nazis’ actions are not rooted in magical or pagan
ideas— they are rooted in the hatreds and fears first conjured in the Christian Middle Ages.
The obsession with the Jews and the belief that they were agents of evil in the midst of the
good folk of Germany — and ultimately responsible for every social, political and
economic ill suffered by the people — is a thoroughly medieval one. Such ideas were part
and parcel of establishment thinking in the Christian Middle Ages. The only direct root for
Nazi enmity toward the Jews is in the medieval Christian hatred of them as “Christ kill ers.”
The only modem addition to this is that the Nazis now added to the theological argument
for the Jews being an “evil race” (an idea Christian Church Fathers introduced) scientific
and pseudo-scientific arguments stemming from Darwinist and even Theosophical
doctrines.
A careful study of all the facts regarding the true nature of Nazi ideology reveals that the
whole “Occult Nazi Mythos” is bogus in character, and misses the whole point of any real
Black Magical, or left-hand path aspects that might have been occurring in the National
Socialist movement For the most part the Nazis Sought of themselves as being on the on
the side of Nature, and their mission was seen as being an entirely “hygienic” one— they
would rid Nature and the world of its diseased and degenerate segments and cultivate and
nurture the healthy and wholesome wherever they could find it
Final answers on the actual character of any occult or magical practices undertaken by
the Nazis are impossible to arrive at because the records of these, if they ever existed,
would have been destroyed at or before the end of the war. In the absence of any hard
evidence, we are reduced to inconclusive speculations. The records of Nazi investigations
into occult, religious and magical matters that we have can be found in the archive in
Koblenz, and in the Library of Congress where photographic copies of that material are
stored. A review of that material shows no traces of Satanism or black magic in the usual
sense.
The Life of Adolf Hitler
— The Wolf Unbound —
Hitler — whose nick name, or code-name was “Wolf’ — was bom in Braunau am Inn,
Austria on 20 April 1889. The given name “Adolf’ means “the Noble Wolf.” Evidence
indicates a troubled childhood in an authoritarian household. He left school when he was
16 dreaming of becoming a painter. In 1907 he made his way to Vienna where he led a
bohemian life-style until 1913.
It was in this Viennese milieu that he received his education in politics and in the racial
and perhaps mystical doctrines that would shape his future philosophy. Of course, the
hatred of the Jews and the Marxists was an important part of this world view. It was at this
timpi that he was exposed to the doctrines of Lanz von Liebenfels, and perhaps also Guido
von List.
In 1913 Hitler moved to Munich, Germany. Shortly thereafter war broke out in Europe
and he joined the German army and served courageously on the front After the war he
worked as a domestic spy for the German army. He ended up joining one of the groups he
was supposed to investigate — the German Workers’ Party — which had about 40
members at the time. The party soon thereafter changed its name to the National Socialist
German Workers Party, colloquially known at the “Nazis.” By 1921 Hitler had been
elected chairman of the party and had personally chosen its symbol: the swastika or
Hakenkreuz .
121
By November 1923 Hitler’s party and other nationalist groups were ready to try to
conduct a Putsch against the Bavarian government. In the resulting street battle 16 of the
Nationalists were killed and the Putsch failed. Hitler was arrested and sentenced to prison.
While in Landsberg prison he dictated his book Mein Kampf to his associate Rudolf Hess.
There he also underwent a personal transformation from a rabblerouser into a cunning
politician.
After tmup months in prison he was released. By 1926 he had rebuilt the disintegrated
NSDAP. From that time to his final election as Chancellor of Germany in January of 1933
Hitler undertook a relentless campaign of political organization. Once in power he
consolidated that power through various maneuvers until he was absolute dictator of
Germany by the next year.
Subordinates Heinrich Himmler, Hermann Goering, Josef Goebbels and to a lesser
extent Alfred Rosenberg were allowed to control certain aspects or segments of the new, or
“Third Reich.” .
By 1935 Hitler had begun to build up German military power and in 1938 Austria was
finally made a part of Greater Germany, he met with success after success in domestic and
foreign affairs. The outside world, as well as the Germans seemed to both fear and admire
him. - , *
In September of 1939 the Germans invaded Poland using Blitzkrieg tactics— and the
Second World War was underway. For the first three years of the war, from late 1939 to
mid -1942, the Germans were virtually unstoppable. But from the middle of 1942, with the
Americans now in the war, the Germans began to suffer defeat after defeat on both the
eastern and western fronts. The final moments came for Hitler when he committed suicide
in his bunker in Berlin on Walpurgisnacht, 1945, with the Red Army entering the now all
but flattened city above.
The Life of Heinrich Himmler
— Lord of the Black Knights —
Himmler was bom 7 October 1900 in Munich. His father was a pious Roman Catholic
school teacher. He served in the German army just at the end of the First World War and
from 1918 to 1922 attended the Munich Technical University. During his less than
successful business career after this time, he became involved with a nationalist
organization and participated in the 1923 Putsch led by Hitler and the NSDAP. From 1925
to 1930 he was propaganda leader of the Party, and in 1929 was named leader of the
Schutzstaffel (SS)— the at that time 200-man body guard of the Fiihrer. By 1933 SS
membership stood at 52,000.
Himmler envisioned the SS as an elite corps of modem knighthood— who would serve
as the cutting edge in the generation of the long awaited superman, or master race. This SS
superman would be leader, scholar, warrior and administrator all in one.
The ReichsfUhrer-SS was given progressively greater powers during the National
Socialist reign. He became the supreme commander of a private army, the Waffen SS , was
given complete control of all the eastern territories occupied by the German Reich and
eventually became the head of all political and state police forces both inside and ontside
Germany.
The center of Himmler’s world-wide SS empire was to be Castle Wewelsburg m
Westphalia. There the SS was to have its magical headquarters where the knights of his
order would be educated and trained, and where they would hold their rites of chivalry.
Other castles, called Ordensburgen (“order-castles”) were also instituted. t .
The branch of the SS most responsible for its reputation as an “occult order’ is the
Ahnenerbe (“ancestral heritage”) which was instituted to study ancient Germanic culture
and religion, including runes, astronomy, architecture and other occult traditions with
which Himmler was fascinated.
122
Himmler’s SS became a “state within a state” in Nazi Germany. At the end of the war
Himmle r attempted to negotiate separately with the Allies in the west in hopes of stabilizing
that region so he could carry on the fight in the east In the final moments of the war when
Hitler found out about Himmler’s actions the Ftihrer denounced him and removed him
from his official positions. Shortly after Himmler was captured by the Allies in the west, he
committed suicide by means of a poison capsule on 23 May 1945.
Sources for the Study of the Nazis and Mag ic
The major primary sources for the study of the magical or religious aspects of the
National Socialist movement in Germany would be the Ahnenerbe archives, as well as the
many official publications of the SS, the Rosenberg Office and other branches of the
NSDAP. The most valuable secondary studies have been provided by Klaus Vondung
(1971), Michael Kater (1974) and Ulrich Hunger (1984). The roots of what was to
become, at least in part, the NS ideology can be studied in the works of Lanz von
Liebenfels, Guido von List, and dozens of others. It must be stressed, however, that these
neo-Rom antic mystics were not “Nazis ” nor were their ideologies identical to those of the
later Nazis. Some of their ideas were simply used by the founders and developers of NS
ideology. One of the most important studies of this aspect is Wilfried Daim’s DerMatm,
der Hitler die Ideen gab. (1958). This is an exhaustive treatment of Lanz von Liebenfels
and his possible influences on Nazi ideology.
— Nazi Cosmology —
The cosmology underlying Nazi ideology is reminiscent of Manichaen dualism. The
important factor is that there is an ongoing conflict in the world— a conflict between the
forces of darVnptss and evil (embodied in the subhuman species of mankind) and the forces
of light and good (embodied in the embattled Aryan). The Aryan is good, not by virtue of
his actions or beliefs but by his very nature and organic essence. By the same token the
subhumans are evil by reason of their organic inferiority. The cosmic struggle is an organic
one between subhumans whose agenda it is to destroy the human Aryan race before it has a
chance to evolve into the superhuman race of the future.
The idea of conflict is essential to Nazi cosmology. This is why the apparently pseudo¬
scientific theories of Hans Horbiger concerning cosmic fire and ice were so attractive.
Many believed that the Aryan man had a “divine spark” which was more evident in
ancient times, but that this spark had become clouded, and under the influence of Judaized
Christian culture backward steps were taken in the evolution of the superman. On the most
magical level the National Socialist agenda was to aid this further evolution of the Volk (the
most advanced of the Aryan race, the Germanics). Instead of the economically driven
historical dialectic of the Marxists the Nazis had an organically (nationally) determined
evolutionary dialectic. The end result would, however, be similar in both cases. There
would be on earth a paradise ruled by a perfected species of man. For the Marxist this
would be achieved through revolution, “education” and strict planning of the economy—
providing for all the material wants of the people. For the Nazi this paradise would be
brought about through conquest, hygiene, and eugenics— selective breeding leading to the
evolution of the superman. In both the case of Marxism and National Socialism, the
cosmological model is probably evolved from the Judeo-Christian model. Table 7:1
comparatively shows the cosmological relationships among these ideologies.
123
Table 7:1 The Judeo-Christian, National Socialist and Marxist Cosmologies(5)
Racial Mixture Hitler
‘Tinal Solution”
Aryan
World
Domination
Destruction
of
Subhumans
Private Property Marx Communism
World
Nazi Methodology
We can speak of a form of Nazi magic with a definite aim— the divination of the Volk.
Its methodology is, however, something other than what many books on “occult Nazism”
might lead one to believe. Attempts to attach Nazi magical methods with those of
mainstream western occultism— Crowley, Gurdjieff, and so on, completely miss the
mark. Nazi magic is rooted entirely in an organic model There is a mysterious element, a
hidden or occult component, that goes beyond established genetic sciences. Poetically or
mystically this might be referred to as “the blood,” but more analytical min ds might want to
designate it as some particular DNA pattern.
The methods described here must be interpreted as “magical” because they are intended
to cause changes in conformity with will and they are m airin g use of theories that exceed,
or stand outside of, the established science of their day or ours.
Four main magical methods are used: hygiene, eugenics, war and ritual. Each supports
the other, makes the other possible and each is necessary until the fmal perfection of the
superman has been achieved.
Hygiene is the maintenance of health and the prevention of disease. In the magico-
racialist sense used here it is the maintenance of purity and the prevention of further mixed
breeding between “Aryans” and “non-Aryans.” This became the object of laws established
124
in Germany in 1935, the so-called Nuremberg Laws. This hygienic stage — which is
essentially an operation to separate the “good” from “evil” — is somewhat passive. It only
“restores health and prevents disease.”
Beyond the hygienic stage is the more active eugenic stage. With eugenics the work
becomes one of actually improving, or evolving the Volk (now elected through hygienic
measures) into the willed object of the operation. This more complex and delicate phase of
the method was only partially undertaken in the Nazi regime. Eugenics attempts to select
specimens for reproduction which display elements most similar to the aimed for resultant
fono
Himmler indeed envisioned establishments which would correspond to the much
invoked horror of “breeding camps.” Although his version would have sounded much
more “romantic.” Programs such as the Lebensbom (“Well of Life”) were designed to
ensure that Aryan women had Aryan children, and that Aryan orphans would have shelter
and safe haven from the war. SS men were chosen for their racial characteristics, and
German women were encouraged to have children by them (as many as possible) before
they were sent off to war (probably to die). In this way the racial stock was not only
maintained but improved since the offspring would be those of brave warriors.
War and conflict is important to the whole process for a number of reasons. War is
necessary to protect and defend the Aryan racial stock and to help destroy subhuman
genetic elements which threaten it now, or may threaten it in the future. War and conflict of
all kin ds helps to harden the basic Aryan stock and select out of that stock the fittest and
most powerful. War can be the final proving ground — in an objective way for the
superiority of the superman. Also war is in and of itself a kind of meta-ritual— which
organizes and focuses the attention of a whole culture on an enormous undertaking. This is
obviously necessary when one is trying to revolutionize a culture at the root level this
was true for Marxist revolutionary societies as well. If there is no war really going on, one
needs to be created in fact or in propagandistic fiction.
The importance of ritual and spectacle, public and private, is obvious to anyone who
has seen films of Nazi rallies, parades, and so on. The National Socialists were modem
masters of symbolism and ritual— what would be called Lesser (Black) Magic in left-hand
path circles today. (Nowadays only rock concerts and sports events remain as pathetic
attempts at this kind of spectacle.)
The ritual was necessary to focus attention on the cause and shape and nature ot the
cause on a day in, day out basis. As individuals can be transformed by rituals, whole
cultures can also be metamorphicized though collective participation in such rituals. Even
marginally effective ones, if repeated often and long enough, will have some result But it
may take only one good jolt from a highly potent rite to have a profound and lasting effect
The Nazis used both kinds.
The Rituals of Nazism
Although the NSDAP and all its various groupings, such as the SS and the Hitler-
Youth had many kinds of rituals and festivals, we will concentrate here on the more public
ones There is some public record of these, which has been recorded. Of the more secret
rites, little to nothing remains for us to record. A lengthy discussion of National Socialist
liturgy can be found in Klaus Vondung’s Magie und Manipulation (1971).
From the calendrical rites we can form a well-rounded picture of the kind of rituals the
Nazis were developing. Besides the “Ceremonies of the Reich and the Course of the Year ”
other liturgical formats used by them were: “Morning Ceremonies” ( Morgenfeiem ) also
called “philosophical hours of celebration,” “Ceremonies of Life” (rites of passage), and
the dramatic celebratory plays and so-called 77twzg-plays. This latter type of ritual was an
effort to create a mass drama in which the audience, or congregation, participated in poetic
chants with actors or choral groups. Special open-air theaters, called Thingstatten (“Thing-
Steads”) were built for this purpose in the early years of the Reich.
125
From the beginning we want to avoid the mistake of assuming this liturgy was a
standardized one, or that it was ever fully developed during the short history of Nazism.
Some features were developed only late (after the war had begun) and others fell away in
the early years, some ceremonial forms were practiced only in certain segments of the
Party— which, despite the Fuhrerprinzip, was far from a monolithic entity. There was a
deep aesthetic-ceremonial rift between proponents of a Romantic-Germanic style (favored
by Himmler and Rosenberg) within the SS and the Hitler-Youth, and a Neo-Classical style
favored by Hitler (and hence the “mainstream” of the Party).
Ceremonies of the Reich and Course of the Year
It was clear from the be ginnin g of the Third Reich that the Party was actively trying to
displace orthodox Christianity. One of the most significant ways it set about doing this was
through the institution of its own “sacred calendar.” The main days celebrated were:
30 January: Day of Coming to Power
The main liturgical act was a night-time torchlight parade as a re-enactment of the one held
on that night in 1933. Its significance was the fetal victory of the Party.
24 February: Proclamation of the Party Program
This was, in the early years, celebrated by Hitler and the “old guard” in the Hofbrauhaus in
Munich in private ceremonies. It was in the beer hall that Hitler had first proclaimed the
program of the party on this date in 1920. This was only briefly a special day of pnblic
celebration (1934-1935). Its significance was the mythic foundations of victory— which
would come to fruition on 30 January 1933.
16 March: Heroes’ Memorial Day
This holiday was taken over from the Weimar Republic and was originally called "Day of
Popular Mourning” ( Volkstrauertag )— and was a day for mourning the dead of the (First)
World War. But it was Nazified into a day of heroic celebration of those who fell in battle.
Last Sunday in March: Pledging of the Youth
This was analogous to confirmation in the Christian churches. It was the day on which the
14 year old boys and girls could transfer to the Hitler-Youth (Hitler-Jugend) or League of
German Girls (Bund deutscher Model) from the corresponding “junior leagues” of these
organizations. Although this was an individual rite of passage, it had national significance
as a time of celebrating the commitment of youth to the movement
20 April: Hitter’s Birthday
Only once was this a legal holiday, but three important liturgical events took place on this
day: the acceptance of 10 year olds into the German Youth-Folk, and League of Young
Girls, military parades, and the swearing in of Political Leaders of the Party. This latter
event was staged in full liturgical splendor at night in the Konigsplatz in Munich illuminated
with torches and vessels of fire.
1 May: National Day of Celebration of the German Folk
This was an ancient festival, which through Marxist influence had acquired the connotation
of a “labor day.” The Nazis combined these ideas to celebrate the worker as well as “joy
over the victory of eternally new life.” Goebbels declared it the highest holiday of the
German people.
German Easter and High May
Two days that had taken on Christian importance, Easter and Pentecost (fifty days after
Easter)— called “High may” in the folk tradition — were repaganized by the National
Socialists. These were celebrated with neo-Germanic festivities and had the function of
focusing the attention of the folk on their national heritage as distinct from the
internationalist form of Christianity.
Second Sunday in May: Mothers’ Day
After the war had begun in 1939, the Nazis instituted ceremonies in which mothers who
had borne a certain number of children would be invested with a Cross of Honor, and
those mothers who had lost children in the fighting were escorted by flower-bearing Hitler-
Youth to ceremonies where they received places of honor.
126
21 June: Summer Solstice
This was especially celebrated by the Hitler-Youth and the SS, the groups most interested
in Germanic traditions. In the SS it was the time when good Aryan marriages were made,
and other neo-Germanic festivals were held. After 1937 Goebbels arranged a more Neo-
Classical ceremony in Olympia Stadium in which the solstice fire was ignited— to
symbolize the victory of the Aryan race. As usual, this ceremony was held at night.
First Half of September: Party Day of the Reich
This was the most important celebration of the full power of the Party— the triumph of its
will, as it were. Actually this consisted of an entire week of political and ritual events. In
1934 these were recorded by Leni Riefenstahl in her famous film Triumph des Willens.
Beginning of October: Harvest Thanksgiving Day
As 1 May was the workers’ day, this was the day to honor the fanner— held in high regard
in the “Green” Nazi Blut und Boden ideology. The Harvest Festival Rally was held in the
1930s in the town of Biickeberg near Hameln. Hundreds of thousands of farmers were
brought to this festival which also had a set liturgy, the high point of which was the
presentation of the harvest-crown to the Fiihrer . This symbolized the presentation of the
harvest to the entire Volk.
9 November: Memorial Day
for the Fallen of the Movement
This is the anniversary of the failed Putsch of 1923. by all accounts this was the most
religiously loaded cultic affair of the Party. In the ritual the “Old Guard,” those who had
been there on that day in 1923, and who had been invested by Hitler with a special medal
— the Blutorden — gathered with the Fiihrer in front of the Burgerbrdukeller beer-hall and
marched toward the Feldhermhalle, where 16 of their number had best felled by gunshot
in 1923. This march was led by member of the Blutorden bearing before them the famed
“Blood-Flag,” the one carried on that day and which had been stained with the blood of the
martyrs. As they marched they passed pylons upon which were written the names of 240
“fallen of the movement” As the “Blood-Flag” passed by each pylon the name of the
martyr was called out Throughout this procession the Horst-Wessel-Lied (anthem of the
Party) blared out through loud-speakers. When they reached the Feldhermhalle 16 canon
shots rang out Hitler laid a wreath on the memorial stone of the martyrs as the Lied vom
guten Kameraden played, followed by the Deutschlandlied (“Deutschland, Deutschland,
tiber alles...) which swelled in intensity as the marchers continued their way to the
K&nigsplatz — where the martyrs had been entombed in the ’Temple of Honor/* Here a
speech — usually by Goebbels — was made, the names of the martyrs were read out as the
gathered Hitler-Youth answered chorally: ‘Here!” After every name there were three-gun
salutes. The Horst-Wessel-Lied was again played, followed by the Badenweiler march
(Hitler’s favorite) and the Deutschlandlied.
21 December and the “Holy Nights”— Winter Solstice
Although already largely pagan in form, the German Christmas festivities became the
targets of Nazi liturgical reinterpretation. Himmler was especially interested in re-German
icizing the festival as the Yule-Fest Goebbels and Rosenberg both used more subtle
means. In all cases, however, since this festival always had been (even in pagan times) a
private family or clanic and not a public affair, it did not become a candidate for massive
Nazi liturgy. It posed a new problem: how to develop National Socialist traditions in
private homes. It was 1942 before this began to take on set forms (outside the SS where
Himmler’s version of the Yule-Fest had long been practiced). The festival was to consist of
three major celebrations: 1) of the “troop” (that is, within the NS organizations, military
groups, etc.), 2) of the community, and 3) of the family. During the Christmas seasons of
1943 and 1944 the Ministry of Propaganda issued a book called Deutsche Kriegs-
weihnachten (A German War-time Christmas) which gave a full private liturgy with songs,
poems, customs and legends. This went so far as to present the legend of the dead soldier
who returned for “Holy Nights” to participate invisibly in the celebrations of the family.
127
There were many kinds of ritual used by the Nazis, but a common form underlying at
least a part of most of the, and clearly defining many of them, was a 16 point working
outline divided into three parts:
Parti:
Fanfares
1. Marching in of the banners and flags
2. Common song
3. Poetic invocation
4. Choral of the troops (ritualized chants)
Part II:
5. The Eternal Watch (Word of the Fuhrer )
6. Choral of the troops
7. Address of the highest ranking official
8. Honoring of the Fallen
9. Oath of Obligation (to dead, Volk, etc.)
10. Honoring of the Dead (ancestors, heroes, etc.)
11. Choral of the troops
Part III:
12. Solemn vows
13. Common song
14. Honoring of the Fuhrer (threefold Sieg Heill )
15. National hymns, ie. Horst-Wessel-Lied and the
DeutschlandHed
Fanfares
16. Marching out of the banners and flags
As a form of Lesser Magic these rituals had many functions. Among them were the
forging of a focused “mass will” of the Volk , the creation of a deep sense of self-
consciousness as an organic entity, the bonding of that entity to a set of symbols, the
projection of the entity through those symbols back in time to the ancestors and forward in
time to the descendants.
The ritual devices were often complex and manifold, but they generally consisted of
these elements: ritually shaped space, motion within that space, color, sound (music), and
the spoken word. All this was played out in a pattern of dynamic tension between the
individual and the gathered mass— nowhere is this more symbolically clear than the sight
of the Fuhrer addressing the faithful troops at Nuremberg.
The magical methodology of the National Socialists, as we can reconstruct it today,
extended from private chambers to mass rallies, from traditional folk-festivals to high-tech
electronics, from the rites of war to the rites of spring. As with all magic, however, the aim
must be kept firmly in focus when attempting to understand it. In this instance the aim was
the forging of the Master Race— the Volk made divine. The methods involved the attempt
to separate the genetic foundation for this massive working from the rest (for this hygiene
and war were necessary), and the transformation of that foundation (for which ritual and
eugenics were needed). The most massive problem was cultural in nature— how to
motivate millions of the most modem, well-educated educated people in the world to
cooperate in the most radical social and magical experiment in history? The attempt to
manipulate the mass-mind to these ends was the underlying factor in much of that which
we can readily identify today as real “Nazi occultism.”
128
The Nazis and the Left-Hand Path
The closest comparison to the National Socialist doctrines with regard to the left-hand
path would be those of Marxism. Whereas Marxism proceeds from a materialistic
cosmology and looks to social and economic factors in creating its ideology for the
perfectibSity of the human species, National Socialism proceeds from a mystically organic
model and looks to racial and military factors in creating its model for the deification of the
elected Volk .
In the final analysis we must again ask ourselves whether the Nazis are in any real
sense to be aligned with the left-hand path. On the essential element of self-deification, the
Nazis present a mixed picture. The FUhrerprinzip — the idea of an absolute ruler of god¬
like power — is in a sense consistent with left-hand path ideas. But this is institutionalized
in a statist form which is an anathema to the general practice of the left-hand path focused
on the individual. Hitler may have been able to practice the path of the left-hand, or perhaps
Himmler, but few below them. (And it is highly doubtful whether either of these men
understood themselves in this capacity.) The deification in Nazism is contained not in the
individual, and not in the whole of the human species (as with Communism) but in the
particular organic strain of humanity known as the Aryans. It is the Volk as an organic
construct which will reach the state of divinity in the National Socialist model
The Nazis were to separate this new “god” from all others, and develop it to a new level
of being. If there is a crux to the issue of the nature of “evil” with regard to the National
Socialists, or to the question of whether they practiced any sort of “black magic,” surely
this is it The Nazi represents a race-based nationalistic rebellion against the natural cosmic
order (or perhaps modem “conventional order”), just as the true Black Magician represents
that rebellion in the individual ego.
This fact negates the viability of the essential individualistic component to the practice
of the left-hand path. The individual is almost totally irrelevant in the ideology of Nazism—
except as a mythic heroic model for behavior suited to the aims of the State.
The National Socialist penchant for rank and status and for hierarchical command
structures is not unique in any way. This should not be confused as a sign of magical
initiation. A higher rank in an organization indicates the level of service that person is
capable of rendering the organization, but is not intended to indicate the level of being or
essence attained by that individual as a human being. The most “magical” aspect of
National Socialist “rankings” would have to do with the relative “purity” of a person’s
“blood.” The more pure the person’s blood, the closer he or she came to being a part of the
divine ideal As genetic, or eugenic, magic was the major Nazi methodology for working in
the field of magical reality — the genetic structure of the Volk — “initiatory progress” in
this could hardly be measured in individual terms, but only in familial ones.
Indeed the Nazis did use magic of a most sophisticated and modem kind. The Lesser
Magical use of symbolism and spectacle to manipulate and direct the masses is only be
rivaled by Madison Avenue. On a higher level, when it comes to magic used to transform
the Self into the image of the divine, it is also clear that there was much magic in the
practices of the Third Reich. These are most pronounced in the chivalric mythology and
methods of the SS and in the meta-ritual of racial transformation. The degree to which these
methods could be called Black Magic is open to interpretation. In that the aims are usually
collectivist and thought to be “ordained by Nature,” they would seem to be more “white
magical.” But seen from the level of the selected (separated and independent) folk-group
the picture becomes darker. The separated group, with its own idiosyncratic characteristics,
imposes its will on the environment around it— contrary to the “natural” flow of
convention and historical development
Antinomianism is also a complex issue when analyzing National Socialism. The Nazis
never embraced conventional symbols of evil, and never identified themselves with Satanic
imagery. Their antinomianism was of a far more modem kind.
129
Nazi ideology went against the grain of history— it opposed modernism in all its
forms. This was not because the Nazis feared change or were “conservative” in the usual
sense— they were even more radical in their desire to embrace the future than their Marxist
counterparts. They opposed trends of modernism they felt to be embodied in materialism,
positivism, internationalism and Marxism. In this process the Nazis did adopt some
features of medieval ideology— such as anti-Semitism. But this was a concession to
conventional wisdom rather than a radical departure from social norms of the day.
The great trend of cultural history was toward egalitarianism, materialism, rationalism,
and the belief that all problems have essentially socioeconomic and environmental causes.
Today we, as a society, stand firmly in the midst of these opinions and sentiments. Many
among us worship these values as if they were God Almighty— and it is against this God
that the Nazis rebelled.
National Socialism might best be described as a uniquely post-modem, organic school
of the left-hand path. They have an organic, collective basis (Folk), but do have a gradual
(initiatory) perspective on the transformation of the entity in question from its mundane
base into its divine state using magical means— a triumph of the will.
130
Notes for Chapter 7
(1) Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke, The Occult Roots of Nazism (Wellingborough, UK: Aquarian, 1985),
pp. 217-225.
(2) Goodrick-Clarke, The Occult Roots of Nazism, pp. 33-65 and Edred Thorsson, Rune Might (St
paul, MN: Lewellyn, 1989), pp. 9-26.
(3) Goodrick-Clarke, The Occult Roots of Nazism, pp. 7 fit; Rudolf Rnsten, ed.. Was tut not?: Ein
Fiihrer durch die
gesamte Literatur der Deutschbewegung (Leipzig: Hedler, 1914). pp. 43-99 and Lother, Helmut
Neugermanische Religion und Christentum (Gutersloh: Bertelsmann, 1934).
(4) Wilfiried Daim, Der Mam der Hitler die Ideen gab (Munich: Isar. 1958), pp. 176-177.
(5) See Hermann Rauschning Rauschning, Hermann. Voice of Destruction. [=Gespr£tche mit Hitler ]
New York: Putnam, 1940, p. 210.
131
Chapter 8
THE OCCULT REVIVAL
Against the grain of growing rationalism and scientism of the late 19th and early 20th
century there was a groundswell below the surface of establishment culture. This occult
movement had its roots in ancient traditions as they had been revived in the Renaissance
and early modem era. The deep level appeal of Satanic imagery to this movement is
perhaps best accounted for in the fact that it was essentially a counter-cultural force. As
James Webb has put it, this constituted a "flight from reason ”(1)
From a modernistic, evolutionary perspective this “flight from reason” may seem to
constitute some kind of flaw or cultural sin. Progress is, after all, die summum bonum of
the modem mind-set The left-hand path elements of the occult revival are therefore quite
fitting. A revival of the occult in an age in which the light of pure science was to shine
brightest and show the way to a rational future is a powerful antinomian statement
One aspect of this scientific revolution had to be accounted for in the occult revival:
Evolution. Charles Darwin published his Origin of the Species in 1859. The compelling
idea that man had evolved from lower life forms rather than that God had created mankind
was revolutionary and was a great challenge to traditional religious cosmologies. The occult
revival, however, seemed to embrace the concept of evolution— albeit in its own mystical
model.
The occult revival can be dated from the year of the foundation of the Theosophical
Society (and the birth of Aleister Crowley)—1875. It effectively comes to an aid, or to the
end of its first phase at the end of World War IL This revival was characterized by a myriad
of organizations, societies, orders and schools. But the most important from a left-hand
path viewpoint were the Theosophical Society, the orders of Aleister Crowley and their
derivatives, the magic of Austin Osman Spare and the Work of G. L Gurdjieff.
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky
and
The Theosophical Society
Perhaps no other figure is more responsible for the 20th century occult revival than
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky (nee von Hahn). She was bom in the Ukraine in 1831 the
daughter of an officer in the Russian army. Her mother and grandmother provided female
role models of non-conformity with upper-class values. Helena’s mother wrote novels
under the pseudonym Zenaida R-Va. These novels concerned the social position of women
in revolutionary terms, her grandmother, Helena Pavlovna de Fadeef, was an informed
correspondent of famous scientists of her day with a keen interest in geology and botany.
She even has a fossil named after her the Venus Fadeef.
In childhood Helena Petrovna was known for her active imagination. She was able to
spin wild yams and create whole worlds out of her mind even at a young age. In 1847, just
before she turned 17, she was married by arrangement to Nikifor Blavatsky who was then
40. Blavatsky was to be the vice-governor of Yerivan in Armenia. But after only a brief
time Helena abandoned Nikifor and made her way to Constantinople.
133
For about the next 25 years there is little concrete evidence for what Blavatsky s life
was like. To these years, which must have been formative for her intellectual development,
Bruce Campbell has assigned four major characteristics:^) , XT .
1) She is known to have traveled throughout Europe, the Middle East and North
2) She was involved with spiritualism and knew Paulus Metamon in Cairo and D.
D. Holm in England. . , , ,
3) She led a generally “Bohemian” existence, took drugs (especially hashish), had
affairs with several men and perhaps bore as many as two children out of
wedlock. , . . . . r -
4) Also she was possessed of a certain feeling of mission about her own hie.
In 1871 she founded her first organization, the Societe Spirits in Cairo. After some
further travels she eventually emigrated to the USA in 1873. In New York she worked at
various jobs, including the manufacture of artificial flowers. The next year she met Henry
Steel Olcott, a journalist and occult enthusiast, at a house in Chittenden, Vermont famous
for its “spiritualistic” phenomena. Olcott and Blavatsky became friends, and in 1875 they
founded the Theosophical Society with a number of others interested m spiritualism and
ancient wisdom teachings. HPB was not the sole leader of the group at first, she was the
Corresponding Secretary. Her talents were not administrative, but it was her charisma and
writings which attracted and held most Theosophists to the cause. .
Shortly after founding the society HPB went to Prof. Hiram Carson s house in Ithica,
New York. She went there to help the professor make spiritual contact with his daughter
who had recently died. It was there that she began to write her first major work,/sis
Unveiled. Together with Olcott she continued writing this two volume opus in New York
City. The work was published in 1877. Even then, shortly after its publication, it was
noticed that a large amount of it had been plagiarized from about 100 books on the occult
commonly available at that time. William E. Coleman found about 2000 plagiarized
passages lifted verbatim from these books.(3)
Fraud, trickery and plagiarism were common traits of Blavatsky s method of operation.
How much of her efforts in these directions can be ascribed to the motives of the left-hand
path Buddhist conjuror and how much to the motives of the confidence (wo)man is left for
otherstothe twQ Qr years th e Society stagnated and membership dwindled as it
tried to find its own identity outside spiritualism. In 1878 there was a brief official merger
between the TS and the Arya Smaj, an Indian organization promoting a return to archaic
Vedic, Aryan (Indo-European) values and customs. This was the beginning of a long-time
close relationship the TS was to have with Indian society and politics. At the very end of
1878 Blavatsky and Olcott set sail for India, In February of 1879 the headquarters of the
TS were moved first to Bombay, later to Adyar. Theosophy became more and more open
to increasing amounts of Indian teachings, both Hindu and Buddhist Over 100 chapters of
the Society were opened in India at that time.
It is only after this time (1879) that the Mahatmas ( great-souled-ones ), or Masters,
became an integral part of Theosophical teachings, although HPB would later claim that she
had been taught by them in Tibet back in that obscure, pre-1873, period in her life. But it
seems most reasonable to conclude that the whole story of the Mahatmas was fabricated as
a common sorcerers ploy to gain prestige, power and charisma— much like Anton LaVey
and Carlos Casteneda would do in the 1960s and 1970s of our century. , ,
Blavatsky translated her mediumistic talent for communicating with people s dead
relatives to one for co mmuni cating with “Hidden Masters.” here too is the root of the late
20th century craze for “channeling” baziUion year-old extraterrestrials. In 1884 Blavatsky s
“phenomena” were investigated by the somewhat skeptical Society for Psychical Research
and found to be fraudulent. Also, while HPB was in England her methods were exposed
by a former confidant in Adyar.
134
Blavatsky eventually moved back to England to say in 1887. The last five years of her
life were devoted to writing The Secret Doctrine (1888) and articles for her own journal
Lucifer which she founded at that time. She was also engaged in a power struggle with
Olcott for control of the Society. As a part of this struggle she founded an “Esoteric
Section” as a kind of “inner ordef’ within the Theosophical Society.
In may of 1891 HPB died. But there can be no doubt that her vision and her voice, as
heard through her writings have been the guiding principles for the TS through several
generations of its existence.
One of the chief contributions of the Theosophical Society to the general occult revival
was the profound connections it made between eastern and western occult or religious
teachings. Blavatsky would on numerous occasions make statements to the effect that both
eastern and western traditions were derived from the great “secret doctrine” the common
source of Hindu and Greek wisdom schools.(4) this is, of course, true but the factual
reason for this, the common Indo-European heritage of both, was still obscured from
popular knowledge in Blavatsky’s day. This is somewhat ironic since one of the other
legacies of the TS to the occult revival was an infusion of at least a “faith” in scientific
methods and terminology. The Theosophical Society was to some extent an attempt to
bridge the gap between medieval faith and modem science by h a rk i n g back to “ancient
wisdom.” .
The flow of popularized esoteric information from the east began through the conduit
provided by the TS. It was in this body of information that the ideas of left-hand path
tantrism and right-hand path mysticism entered into the western world on a wide scale.
Theosophy and the Left-Hand Path
The relationship of Theosophy to the left-hand path is highly ambiguous and in many
ways foreshadows the same ambiguities found in the magical career of Aleister Crowley,
who was only 16 when HPB died. Blavatsky was often quick to identify her movement
with the “White Lodge” or the “Great White Brotherhood,” which is occasionally
contrasted with the “Black Lodge.” Blavatsky is usually anxious to claim to be a part of the
White Brotherhood, while at the same time her works are replete with positive references to
Satan and Lucifer. Even her own magazine published in the final years of her life was
called Lucifer. Adding to the ambiguity, she asserts that in theory the end of human
development or initiation is the loss of the spark of individuality in the larger fire, the drop
within the ocean, individuality must be stamped out as the “self of matter ” the “bud of
personality” is crushed so that the SELF of spirit — beyond individuality — may thrive.(5)
But as we see her system in action we do not — even theoretically — see selfless souls
devoid of personality but rather “hidden” and ascended masters— many said to be still
living in human bodies — in the company of great individuals in the history of mankind
from Pythagoras to Jesus, and from Confucius to Mesmer. The implicit reality of the
Theosophical myth is, even by its own definitions, left-hand path. The personality and
individual consciousness is not obliterated, but rather these individuals ascend to a level of
consciousness, individuation and immortality otherwise reserved for gods and goddesses.
We are also reminded of the spiritualistic roots of Theosophy. Spiritualism is a sort of
cult of at least quasi-immortal personalities. Yet in Spiritualism these entities are largely
impotent in their dealings with the living— but the Masters virtually control the living, or
could do so if they wished.
To some extent we must look at Blavatsky’s ideology or system in much the same way
we would look at the staging of one of her “phenomena.” They are both appearances with
hidden realities and with a hidden agenda which comes back to an empowerment of the
sorcerer who creates the appearances, and pertiaps, if he is observant, the enlightenment of
the one who looks on.
Any traditional right-hand path practitioner, whether Hindu or Christian, Buddhist or
Jew, will quickly see in Theosophy a system which glorifies the individual, promotes the
biological interests of the Aryans (Indo-Europeans) and posits a rationally willed method of
135
self-transformation— any one of which would be theoretical reasons to condemn
Theosophy as “left-handed” or “sinister.” But perhaps because of the innate fear and
loathing most humans have of the full implications of the left-hand path— knowledge (for
ignorance is bliss), consciousness, power (for with it comes responsibility), and individual
immortality (for in it there is no peace) — the structures of the left-hand path are hidden and
disguised behind semantic sorceries such as: “And now they Self is lost in SELF. Thyself
unto THYSELF, merged in THAT SELF from which thous first didst radiate ”(6)
HPB and the “Light-Bearer”
The fact that Blavatsky named her personal magazine Lucifer is a positive indication of
her attitude toward that idea and figure in the traditions of humanity. Lucifer was published
at about the rime she was writing The Secret Doctrine during the lak years of her life so the
title can not be dismissed as a youthful indiscretion.
Her understanding of Lucifer-Satan (whom she equates on one level)(7) is clearly a
variant of the Ophite-Gnostic interpretation. When referring to Hebraic tradition she equates
Jehovah Elohim with the demiurge who created the world and man’s physical aspect, and
she sees the true god who liberated man and gave him his divine aspects as Lucifer-Satan.
This divine aspect is one of dynamic spiritual immortality — as opposed to the static
physical immortality offered by Jehovah.(8)
HPB made no apologies for her positive valorization of what orthodox Christian theo¬
logians called “devils,” nor for her negative opinion of those “ignorant and malicious”
theologians and their God and his angels. The “devils” she sees as the true, higher, more
spiritual aspects of the gods (or God).(9)
The God of orthodox theologians is, for Blavatsky, the source of true evil in the world
which is equated with “an antagonizing blind force in nature; it is reaction , opposition , and
contrast ’ but even in this she can see that in reality such things can be “evil for some, good
for others.”(SD, n, 413) From the esoteric doctrines of Hinduism and Buddhism she
seems to have absorbed the principle that the “good” involves an understanding of duality
and the necessity of its preservation, while “evil” is concerned with the destruction of one
aspect (either/or) of the duality by the other.
In The Secret Doctrine she writes:
In human nature, evil denotes only the polarity of matter and Spirit, a struggle
of life between the two manifested Principles in Space and Time, which
principles are one per se, inasmuch they are rooted in the Absolute. In
Kosmos, the equilibrium must be preserved. The operations of the two
contraries produce harmony, like the centripetal and centrifugal forces which
are necessary to each other — mutually inter-dependent — “in order that both
should live.” If one is arrested, the action of the other will become
immediately self-destructive. (SD 1,416)
HPB sees in humanity — or at least a portion of it — the actual incarnation of the
divine spark. In her interpretation of the conflict between Satan and Jehovah she sees that
Satan “claimed and enforced his right of independent judgment and will, his right of
freeagency and responsibility.” This is the true nature of die “fallen angels.” (10) A “fallen
angel” is then an agathodaimon (Gk. “good-spirit”) as opposed to Jehovah and his obedient
angels each of which is a kakodaimon (Gk. “evil-spirit”). The “fallen angels” are an older
creation possessing free will who rebelled against the natural order of Jehovah.(l 1) One of
the revolutionary ideas contained in The Secret Doctrine is that the gift of the divine spark is
the result of actual incarnation of the “fallen angles” in human bodies— through sexual
reproduction. Some of these ideas were later picked up and expanded by J5rg Lanz von
Liebenfels (~ Adolf Joseph Lanz) in works such as Theozoologie .
Whether it is in the Hebrew tradition where she interpreted the myth of Eden recorded
in Genesis (MV) or the in the Greek myth of Prometheus HPB sees metaphors portraying
136
the transformation of “fallen angels” into physical bodies— thus inseminating carnal
humanity with a spark of the divine. Jehovah, or Zeus, created the flesh — senseless and
without a mind — but Lucifer, or Prometheus, “represents the intellect infused into
humanity ”(12) In this way terrestrial man is (or can be) made divine.(13)
Prometheus (and Satan) is seen to break the natural order of strictly preserved cyclic
development and puts the divine gift into a weak physical vessel There arises a tension
between the physical vessel and the divine spirit(14) Again the disharmony between these
two dualistic poles is emphasized.
Blavatsky makes it clear that the divine spark is stronger in some people than others.
She writes that in a certain portion of humanity “the ‘sacred spark’ is missing... mankind
is ‘of one blood’ but not of the same essence (15) The portion of humanity in which the
“fallen angles” incarnated “... preferred free-will to passive slavery, intellectual self-
consciousness pain and even torture.. to inane, imbecile, instinctual beatitude.”(16) All of
this relates to the essentially evolutionary aspect of Theosophy’s esoteric teachings.
The Secret Doctrine contains a whole cosmogony which outlines the predetermined
evolution of “root races” on this planet There will be seven of these. At the apex of present
human evolution is the Fifth Root Race— the “Aryans.” We are now in the twilight of the
Aryan epoch ruled by the Anglo-Saxons— but it will be out of that group that the next root
race w ill necessarily appear. By the way, she located the appearance of the next
evolutionary stage as being in North America.(17) the story of the first root races was one
of a “descent into matter,” during the course of the Fourth Root Race the balance was
tipped in favor of a spiritual evolution— as the species of humanity defined by the divine
spark began its ascent back to a state of deity. This describes the evolutionary path of each
individual, as well as that of the species as a whole.
The rhetoric of Theosophy — especially in later years among Theosophists coming
after HPB — is peppered with references to “black magic” or the “left-hand path.” These
are often used so loosely as to mean nothing more than “un-TheosophicaL" But it is clear
that for HPB herself Lucifer (by whatever name) was her God and that evolution to an
immortal state of independent enlightened existence was her goal This may be sufficient to
consider her a Lady of the Left-Hand Path— even though she might not like the
terminology. ., . , , , .
Theosophy and The Secret Doctrine created untold ripples throughout the occult
revival. Theosophical ideas, while themselves evolving (or devolving), were absorbed to
some degree either directly or indirectly by virtually every occult school in the Anglo-
American and central European worlds. Studies of the initiates of the Golden Dawn and its
off-shoots show the extent of Theosophical ideas present(lS) In Germany not only did the
German Secretary of the Society, Rudolf Steiner, break away to form his own successful
Anthroposophical Society, but the magical order Fratemitas Satumi also shows significant
Theosophical influence.
The Great Beast
Aleister Crowley
No man is more enigmatic in the history of the occult revival than Edward Alexander
Crowley (1875-1947) — better known as Aleister Crowley. He is so enigmatic because
although opinions of him and his work are often strong, they hardly ever agree— and what
makes matters even more knotty is the fact that Crowley himself seems not to have been
totally sure of his own nature: Was he the “Great Wild Beast” or the “World Teacher* or
both? . ,
Most discussions of Crowley quickly descend into recounting of various legends and
anecdotes concerning his exploits. These may be found in numerous books, for example
John Symond’s The Great Beast (1972)— as well as Crowley’s own Confessions. My
intention here is to concentrate on the ideas of Crowley as they possibly relate to the left-
hand path system of magical philosophy.
137
Crowley’s father was a well-to-do beer baron and member of a fundamentalist Christ¬
ian sect known popularly as “the Plymouth Brethren.” His father died in 1886, and Crow¬
ley’s future exploits were largely financed through his inheritance. As a young man his a-
vocations were poetry and mountain climbing. In the last month of 1896, while in Stock¬
holm, he was awakened to the possibilities of magical philosophy. Two years later he was
initiated into the “Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn” (18 November 1898). By 1900 he
had been initiated to the Adeptus Minor grade in the G D , but he was soon thereafter
alienated from the organization and began an independent career in magical studies.
In April of 1904 Crowley conducted a series of magical workings in Cairo, Egypt in
which he received the words of a text entitled Liber Al vel Legist The Book of the Law
from a discamate entity called Aiwaz. In Crowley’s own mythology this event and the
transformation it made in Crowley himself is said to have ushered in a new Aeon in human
history. It was this event, and the product of it — The Book of the Law — would certainly
reshape the rest of Crowley’s life. In 1907 he founded his own magical order, the
ArgenteumAstrum (“Silver Star”). In 1909 Crowley claims the magical grades of initiation
referred to as Adeptus Exemptus and Magister Templi in the G.-.D.-. system. But his
claims were for his own magical order, the A.*. A.*.
The A.-.A.-, ultimately does not fulfill its function as Crowley had envisioned it So in
1912 he begins an alliance with a pseudo-Masonic German lodge — the Ordo Templi
Orientis — which teaches forms of sexual magic akin to Indian tantrism. Crowley was to
become absorbed in this kind of magic for the rest of his life.
On his birthday in 1915 he claimed the initiatory grade of Magus — with the motto or
magical name: To Mega Therion — “the Great Beast.” (See Rev. 13:1-18) The last initiatory
grade was claimed in May 1921— that of Ipsissimus , “his very utmost self.”
The “Great Beast” died in relative obscurity in Hastings, England on 1 December 1947
in the fullness of 72 years of age. But his personality and his ideology — or mythology —
has cast a shimmering shadow over the entirety of the western magical world during the
latter half of the 20th century.
Sources of the Study of Thelemism
Crowley’s philosophy, which might best be termed Thelemism (after his Aeonic Word:
Thelema , “True Will”) or Magick (after his method of attaining and exercising this Will), is
amply documented in the written works of Crowley himself. For our purposes the most
important of these are Book of Lies (1913), Liber Aleph (finished 1918, first published
1961), Magick (1929), The Equinox of the Gods (1937), The Book of the Law (1938),
Eight Lectures on Yoga (1939), The Book of Thoth (1944), his own autobiographical
Confessions (1930), and the periodical The Equinox (vol. I nos. 1-10, 1909-1913). Also
among the most important primary sources for “Crowleyanity” or “Theriology” are two
published diaries The Magical Record of the Beast 666 (1972) and The Magical Diaries of
Aleister Crowley (1979). Secondary material on A.C. is voluminous. Much of it is
sensationalistic or sectarian in its approach. The most useful of this kind seem to be John
Symond’s The Great Beast (1971), Israel Regardie’s The Eye in die Triangle (1970) and
Colin Wilson’s The Nature of the Beast (1987). With all the books and sections of books
written on Crowley no objective study of his ideas has yet been produced.
Crowley’s Magical Orders
Crowley was involved deeply with three magical orders during his lifetime. His
association with the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn was brief, yet formative of many
of his ideas. The G.-.D.-. was founded by a group of British Freemasons in 1888. It
appears to have been greatly influenced by the Theosophy of Madame Blavatsky, although
in many regards it is just an eclectic product of the same occult revivalist milieu of late 19th
century western civilization. However, other than the practice of magic for purposes of
individual empowerment and enlightenment there seems to have been little of the left-hand
path about the G.*.D.-.(19)
138
The initiatory philosophy of the A.-.A.-, will be discussed further below when I
analyze Crowley’s Thelemite initiatory theory. It is useful to realize that the A. -. A. •. was
to initiate its individual members in the magical curriculum of the order that they might
better serve the progress of mankind. Magick, the spiritual technology of the A.-. A.-., was
to be “as systematic and scientific as chemistry.” Crowley designed the A.-.A.*, as a
vehicle of his Aeonic Word (0eXr||ia). Theoretically the design seems well suited to this
purpose. But Crowley himself must have found the A.-.A.-, and its magical methods in
some sense less than viable, because in 1912 he formed an alliance with the Ordo Templi
Orientis (Order of Eastern Templars). The principal method of magical working in the
O.T.O. is sexual. It is known that Crowley had experimented with sexual magic as early as
1902.(20) But he was doing no more than poking around in the dark until his contact with
the O.T.O. His diary entries from 1914(21) express his insecurities and doubts concerning
his effectiveness with this new magical form— this despite the fact that he had claimed the
grade of Magister Templi (in 1909).
As opposed to the coherent and predictable curriculum of the A.-.A.*. the O.T.O.
system is significantly more mysterious. This is because the secret of sexual magic was to
be withheld from the public at large and even from initiates of lower degrees within the
O.T.O. The history of this order is better discussed elsewhere.(22) Crowley incorporated
A. .A.'. ideas into the structure of the O.T.O, which was seen as a valuable tool for the
dissemination of his teachings. From a left-hand path viewpoint one of the most interesting
aspects of the O.T.O. is its use of the magical technologies similar to those of Hindu and
Buddhist tantra.
Crowley’s Cosmology
Crowley’s cosmology, the way he understood the universal order and his place in it,
was dominated by the structures of the Kabbalah.(23) He had first absorbed or internalized
this system, and been predisposed toward acknowledging its prestige and supremacy,
during his training in the G.-.D.*. The principal cosmological tool of the Kabbalah is the
Tree of Life.
Figure 8.1: The Kabbalistic Tree of Life
139
In Magick Crowley wrote: “The Qabalah maps ourselves by means of a convention.
Every aspect of every object may thus be referred to the Tree of life, and evolved by using
the proper keys ”(p. 341) The Tree of Life presents the entirety of the cosmos — the
Universe — as a series of numbered emanations from the Absolute to the mundane or
material universe. From the magical point of view this “map of the cosmos” is supposed to
provide a system of correspondences between and among all things in the Universe. Thus
if one wishes to invoke Venusian qualities into one’s life — a ritual would be designed
using objects symbolic of the 7th sephira of the Tree of Life: e.g. the number seven, the
color green, the sign and image of Venus. By no means did Crowley invent this mode of
thought, of course. It has its origins in prehistory, was already codified by the time of
Pythagoras, Judaized by mystical medieval rabbis, and again pioneered by Florentine
Renaissance philosophers such as Marsilio Ficino. The system was expanded upon by
occultists from Agrippa to Eliphas Levi and formulated in the system Crowley inherited
from the G..D.-. This philosophy posits a unified field of continuous reality in which
everything that exists is in one way or another connected to every other thing.
Another essential element of Crowley’s magical cosmology is the theory of evolution¬
ary stages in the history of the development of humanity. This general idea was very much
in vogue due to the influence of Madame Blavatsky’s Secret Doctrine and the general
Darwinist scientific fashion, perhaps coupled with Marxist theories. Crowley’s tripartite
doctrine of historical evolution (or dialectic) posits an oldest, matriarchal aeon, ruled by
Isis, followed by a patriarchal one ruled by Osiris, which reached its end with the dictation
of Liber AL in 1904. This new aeon is ruled by “the child crowned and conquering”—
Horus.(24) This transition from the aeonic rulership of one god to another is what con¬
stitutes the “Equinox of the Gods.” Crowley’s tripartite aeonic progression had been
anticipated by Joachim of Fiore (1145-1202) as well as by the heretical Brethren of the Free
Spirit flourishing in Germany from the 13th to 17th century. For the Brethren the three
ages were ruled over by the Father, Son and Holy Spirit successively.(See chapter 5.) The
premise of a primeval matriarchal age had also been forwarded by J. J. Bachoffen’s
anthropological theories.(25)
Sexuality was, however, fundamental to A.C.’s outlook on life and the world. This is
reflected in the theo-cosmology contained in The Book of the Law. There we read of the
sexo-cosmological and sexo-psychological interacting of two entities (or qualities) Nu{if),
which is feminine, and Had(it ), which is masculine. Crowley wrote in his 1938
Introduction to The Book of the Law :
This book explains the Universe.
The elements are Nuit — Space — that is, the
total of possibilities of every kind— and Hadit,
any point which has experience of these
possibilities.
Here we have symbols of the Absolute, the Universe, and the subjective universe
defined by the individual psyche. In his “New Comment” (1920) on Liber AL (1:1): “Had!
The Manifestation of Nuit.” Crowley claims that “The theogony of our Law is entirely
scientific. Nuit is matter, Hadit is motion, in their full physical sense... Our central truth—
beyond other philosophies — is that these two infinities can not exist apart.” (26)
Crowley’s symbols — or those of Aiwaz — are chosen from a pseudo-Egyptian store¬
house of images. Nuit was the Egyptian goddess of the vault of the night sky. But there is
no god called “Hadit”— which Crowley identified with the familiar winged sun disk. The
name Hadit seems to have been taken from Arabic hadit, “tradition.” In any event, the
concepts are clear enough. The closest analogs to these basic elements of cosmogony and
cosmology are the yin and yang concepts of Taoist thought, and the concepts of prakriti —
the unmanifested basis — and bindu the universal seed principle — in Indian tantrism.
140
The Universe is a continuous essence for Crowley. The psyche is a part of it, part of
Nature. Attainment is in the end the melding of any one manifestation of self with all else
that exists:
Each one of us has thus an universe of his own, but it is the same universe for
each one as soon as it includes all possible experience. This implies the
extension of consciousness to include all other consciousness. (27)
This is the essence of the Law of Thelema:
“Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.” (AL 1:40)
“Love is the Law, love under Will” (AL 1:57)
“Every man and every woman is a star.” (AL 1:3)
Crowley often comments on these formulas in ways which make them seem to partake of
both right-hand path and left-hand path concepts. However, it is usually clear that he
wishes his work to be understood as being of the right-hand path, and the true teaching of
the Great White Brotherhood.
Philosophy of Man
Understanding of Thelema (True Will) and the progress of its discovery in the
individual is the kernel of Crowley’s philosophy of Man— his Anthropology. Technically,
the Law of “Do what thou wilt” is fulfilled upon the “Attainment of Knowledge and
Conversation of the Holy Guardian AngeL” Concealed in this rather ambiguous and quaint
language is the idea that the individual magician becomes fully and constantly aware of the
divinity or “higher self’ within, or above, his everyday consciousness. (28) From that
moment forward the magician can be informed and transformed by this magical contact
This attainment and subsequent willed actions informed by “Conversation” with this
entity, is the core of the exhortation: “Do what thou wilt” The will is not the base desire,
but the divine or true thelema . From Crowley’s own theoretical viewpoint then, the notion
that the Law of Thelema is a forerunner of “Do your own thing,” or “If it feels good, do
it,” is misguided and inaccurate. (But such “Laws” can never be Understood by the masses
who will always degrade them to their level of perception.)
“Love is the Law, love under Will.” This aspect of Crowley’s formula is nowhere more
succinctly expressed than in Eight Lectures on Yoga (1939). Here he posits that “all
phenomena of which we are aware take place in our own minds, and therefore the only
thing we have to look at it the mind...” (p. 7) he also goes on to affirm that all human
minds are essentially similar and that differences are the product “of systematic sectarian
training.” (p. 7) He posits an important premise when he states “all bodies, and so all
minds, have identical Forms.” (p. 8) Crowley defines “Love” quite precisely as “the
instinct to unite and the act of uniting.” But he tempers this with the admission that this
must be done ‘“under will,’ that is, in accordance with the nature of the particular units
involved.” (pp. 9-10) This Love (Gk ayaTrq) is the act of the uniou of one thing with its
(naturally determined) opposite.
So, for Crowley, the will toward union and the act of uniting with the natural opposite
of the individual self (i.e. the Absolute, or Universe) is the measuring stick for what the
True Will is. Of course, Crowley is well aware of the essential distinction between the left-
hand path and the right-hand path, Black Magick and White Magick, and so is always
philosophically “correct” in his discussions of these matters. In Eight Lectures on Yoga he
makes statements that are among the most straightforward in occult revivalist literature
about the aim of right-hand path Magick:
141
It is therefore incumbent upon us, if we wish to make the universal and final
Yoga with the Absolute... to train ourselves in knowledge and power to the
utmost; so that at the proper moment we may be in perfect condition to fling
ourselves up into the furnace of ecstasy which flames from the abyss of
annihilation.
... [U]ltimate [union]... destroys the sense of separateness which is the
root of Desire [= Love]... [and]... is to be made by the concentration of
every element of one’s being, and annihilating it by intimate combustion with
the universe itself.(29)
Although Crowley constantly seems to champion the concept of liberty — “the Law of
Thelema is the law of liberty ”(30) — most directly expounded in Liber LXXVII (OZ),
which is essentially:
There is no god but man.
1. Man has the right to live by his own law...
2. Man has the right to eat what he will...
3. Man has the right to think what he will...
4. Man has the right to love as he will...
5. Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights...(31)
This championing of pure liberty, while when viewed from an orthodox and
exoterically law-bound system such as Christianity or Islam appears to be the epitome of
the left-hand path and hence a moral framework for Black Magic, must in fact be tempered
by Crowley’s own interpretation of such formulas. Although the Law of Thelema posits no
universal code of morality, id does insist upon the idea that for each individual soul there is
one right or natural path and that all such right paths lead to one goal: annihilation of the
self. From a purely left-hand path perspective this is a disqualifying factor. All this clearly
puts Crowley in a “gray zone” when it comes to our topic.
Crowley’s Theology
A definitive theology is difficult in Crowley’s case. Certainly he held that Man, and the
human mind characterizing the species homo sapiens , is the primary creator of gods and
goddesses, angels and demons. Man “creates” them hy naming them, i.e. categorizing
them and discriminating between and among them. On the one hand for Crowley “Gods are
but names for the forces of Nature them selves.”(32) Bnt he also says that “God [is] the
Ideal Identity of man’s inmost nature.”(33) In Crowley’s thought the supreme God would
then be one’s own Holy Guardian AngeL
The discamate entity which dictated Liber AL to Crowley in 1904 might at first be
thought of as being a type of god-form by some. Others might see it as Crowley’s own
Higher Self. In The Confessions Crowley does himself come to the conclusion that Aiwaz
and his Holy Guardian Angel were one.(34) The discamate spiritual aspects of incarnate
human beings can be true god-forms, if they are invoked often by means of the “spiritual
technology” of Magick. In this regard Crowley has merely returned to the model of
daimonology as held by the ancients. Primarily the magician is his own god, but this god-
form is hidden from his consciousness normally. He must learn and develop techniques for
becoming aware of its existence and its characteristics and absorb them into his everyday
consciousness.
In Crowley’s magical universe, however, there was also a hierarchy of discamate
entities (in some cases perhaps still incarnated in human bodies according to their wills).
These were the “Secret Chiefs.” Crowley had, of course, assimilated this conception from
the G.-.D.-. (with analogs in the Theosophical Society and other occult groups). These
virtual demigods play a pivotal role in Crowley’s understanding of the conscious entities
which motivate change in the world— and in Crowley’s life. In his Confessions he
definitely indicates that the ushering in of the New Aeon and his role in it is the work of the
Secret Chiefs. (35) The very concept of entities such as the “Secret Chiefs” is tinged with
142
left-hand path connotations. These are not '‘gods 7 ’ per se, they are humans who have
become as gods, or god-like, in their immortality, power, and wisdom. It is not within the
purpose or scope book to undertake a discussion of the reality or actual nature of these
entities. But for Crowley they existed. Positing one’s self as the prophet of a New Aeon,
as the Great Beast, is a lonely task. It is more convenient to assume that one is being
“ordered” from “higher up”— so the Secret Chiefs constitute a kind of pantheon of quasi-
divine beings who take a personal interest in the enlightenment of humanity and in the
sponsoring of individual magicians.
The use of Egyptian god-forms in The Book of the Law appears arbitrary. (36) The fact
that Crowley was in Cairo when Liber AL was dictated, coupled with the popularity of
Egyptian god-forms in the G.-.D.-., probably best explains their usage. The divine and
demonic symbols he tended to use were drawn from every culture, and from his
imagination and experience.
To be sure the “god-form” that would interest us most be for this study would be
Satan, or perhaps Set Crowley repeatedly, if poetically and sometimes ambiguously,
equates himself and his own “Holy Guardian Angel” (Aiwaz) with Lucifer or Satan.(37)
He, of course, also liked to envision himself — at least “Magickally” — as an entity from
conventional demonology. Two of his initiatory mottos are also figures from traditional
demonology: Baphomet and To Mega Therion (to) (i£yot 6T|piov)— the Great Beast (Rev.
13:1-18) or the Anti-Christ (= Satan). Satan is in turn equated with Set, the Gnostic god-
form Abrasax (or Abraxas) and even with Adam.(38) This latter equation is important with
respect to the position of Man in Crowley’s system.
But what is the real significance of Satan (by whatever other name) in Crowley’s
theological/daimonological formulas? He is quite clear on this:
The Devil is, historically, the God of any people that one personally dislikes.
This has led to so much confusion of thought that THE BEAST 666 has
preferred to let names stand as they are, and to proclaim simply that AIWAZ
— the solar-phallic-hermetic ‘Lucifer’ is His own Holy Guardian Angel, and
‘The Devil’ SATAN or HADIT of our particular unit of the Starry Universe.
This serpent, SATAN, is not the enemy of MAN, but HE who made Gods of
our race, kno wing Good and Evil; He bade ‘Know Thyself!’ and taught
Initiation. He is ‘the Devil’ of the Book of Thoth and His emblem is
BAPHOMET, the androgyne who is the hieroglyph of arcane perfection. (39)
To understand completely what Crowley is saying we must refer to his general
cosmology which is monistic: all apparent opposites are in reality unities. This is how
Horns is united with Set (See chapter 3.) They are the light and dark opposites within the
same unity. “[T]he true magick of Horns requires the passionate union of opposites.”(40)
This is clearly how, for Crowley, this is the Aeon of Horus, but its root formula is “ShT”
(rendering Satan, Shaitan, Set, etc.)(4l)
Here as elsewhere Crowley is using the famili ar practice of antinomianism. In Liber V
vel Reguli (Ritual of the Mark of the Beast) Crowley lays ont his antinomianism and its
practice:
This is in fact the formula of our Magick; we insist that all acts must be
equal; that existence asserts the right to exist; that unless evil is a mere term
expressing some relation of haphazard hostility between forces equally self-
justified, the universe is as inexplicable and impossible as uncompensated
action; that the orgies of Bacchus and Pan are no less sacramental than the
Masses of Jesus; that the scars of syphilis are sacred and worthy of honour as
such. (Magick, p. 418)
143
He goes on to explain:
The Magician should devise for himself a definite technique for destroying
‘evil’. The essence of such practice will consist in training the mind and body
to confront things which cause fear, pain, disgust, shame and the like. He
must leam to endure them, then to become indifferent to them, then to analyse
them until they give pleasure and instruction, and finally to appreciate them
for their own sake, as aspects of Truth. When this has been done, he should
abandon them if they are really harmful in relation to health or comfort. Also,
our selection of ‘evils’ is limited to those that cannot damage us irreparably.
E.g. one ought to practice smelling asafoerida until one likes it; but not arsine
or hydrocyanic acid. Again, one might have a liaison with an ugly old woman
until one beheld and loved the star which she is; it would be too dangerous to
overcome the distaste for dishonesty by forcing oneself to pick pockets. Acts
which are essentially dishonourable must not be done; they should be justified
only by calm contemplation of their correctness in abstract cases.
(Magick, pp. 418-419)
In his “theology” the results of the application of this antinomianism are that opposites,
such as the Beast and the Lamb (Rev. 13:8) and the Whore of Babylon and the Woman
clothed with the Sun (Rev. 12:1) are only apparent, and that from a higher perspective they
are unities or equivalencies (Beast = Lamb; Whore = Woman).(42)
The very existence of the conventional “Devil” (as a positive and objective entity of
evil) is rejected by Crowley. (43) Evil , such as it is, is seen as a product of subjectivity and
ignorance in humanity: “Satan [is] regarded with horror by people who are ignorant of his
formula, and, imagining themselves to be evil, accuse Nature herself of their own
phantasmal crime.” (44)
Despite the fact that antinomianism is usnally characteristic of the left-hand path,
Crowley uses it to right-hand path ends. Indeed tools or techniques such as antinomianism
are essentially neutral and can be used to a variety of ends. The core of Crowley’s magical
philosophy is the willed dissolntion of opposites — “Let there be no difference... between
any one thing and any other thing.”(45)—in greater unity (agape, love). On the left-hand
path antinomianism points to the separateness or isolation of the self or individual
intelligence from oppositional categories— but the dissolver remains intact and independent
of its dissolutions. While the right-hand path turns antinomianism upon the opposition of
selffnot-self, or psychefphysis , or subjectivity/objectivity as such.
The Technology of Magick
Crowley’s theology can only be understood fully in terms of his system of Magick or
initiation. Magick is Crowley’s technique for practicing “the Science and Art of causing
Change to occur in conformity with Will.”(46) This “Science and art” is to be most
properly applied to the discovery and exercise of the True Will which is uniqne, but also
“natural and necessary” for each individual. Magick is then a program for individual
transformation according to the individual True Will of the one being transformed. Crowley
wanted to postulate Magick as a new scientific discipline. As such he knew that certain
universal principles and patterns should apply. This is another factor which distinguishes
Crowley from the separative left-hand path wherein the distinction between the limited and
nature-bound character of science (dianoia) and the unlimited rational intuition (noesis) is
clear.
However, for the understanding of the structure of the left-hand path as practices in the
contemporary world, the theories of Aleister Crowley are important He provided a soph¬
isticated definition of the character of the left-hand path and what he called Black Magick.
According to Crowley “Black Magick” is characterized by “any will but that to give up
the self to the Beloved”(47) (i.e. the Universe which is the opposite of self-consciousness)
144
or any deviation from the straight line leading to the “Single Supreme Ritual” of “the
attainment of Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian AngeL”(48) But he also
calls “black” any renunciation for “an equivalent in personal gain ”(49) the use of
“[magical]” powers it the object can possibly be otherwise attained,(50) or “the use of
spiritual force to material ends ”(51) Presumably because Crowley had undergone the
“Supreme Ritual,” and was in fact a Magus (9 = 26) he could regularly perform Magick of
the kind in his Magical Record:
1. Dec. 4 p.m. [1916]
Anna Grey [woman with whom Crowley performed an act of
sexual Magick]
[object] Wealth
Operation: difficult but success great as to Object Elixir,
nothing special— good, thongh when duly mixed
Result: $45.00 next day.(52)
Brothers of the Left-Hand Path
In the initiatory system Crowley devised for his A.-.A.-, he described a certain
advanced moment in the process when the initiate could choose to follow the left-hand
path. Until that moment, according to Crowley, all initiates are on the same basic path. (See
Figure 8:2 for the initiatory system of the A.-.A.-.)
The initiate begins as a Student , who studies various systems of spiritual attainment
from a list of books. Next he becomes a Probationer , who undertakes whatever magical
practices he wishes making a record of them for one year. After this he becomes a
Neophyte and acquires “perfect control over the Astral Plane.” he then becomes a Zelator ,
who perfects himself in basic yogic techniques of the body and breathing. Next he becomes
a Practicus and completes intellectual training and study of the Kabbalah. Following this he
becomes a Philosophus and completes his moral training and is tested for his devotion to
the order. He then becomes a Dominus Liminis who masters the yogic techniques of
pratyahara (withdrawal of senses from external objects) and dharana (concentration). After
this point he becomes an “outer'’ Adeptus Minor and performs the Great Work attaining the
Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. (Here the Adept can be said to
have become aware of his own True or Higher Self.) upon completion of this the initiate is
an “inner 7 ’ Adeptus Minor who enters the “College of the Holy Ghost” — or the Order of
the Rosy Cross. Next he becomes an Adeptus Major , who masters practical Magick— but
he does not necessarily understand the true nature of his work. There follows the grade of
Adeptus Exemptus wherein the initiate becomes a leader of a school of thought The
Adeptus Exemptus is a “separate being ... from the rest of the Universe.”(53) He
eventually transits into the “Abyss”—into a zone of negation—wherein he may either:
1) Annihilate himself and become an embryonic
“Babe of the Abyss” — or —
2) Remain in the Abyss isolated from the universe
and become a Black Brother.
It is here, and really only here, that Crowley distinguishes between the right-hand path and
the left-hand path. Beyond the Abyss the “Brother of the Right-Hand Path” will be reborn
as a Magister TempU who has annihilated that personality which had limited and oppressed
his true self. He “is pre-eminently the master of mysticism... his Understanding is entirely
free of internal contradiction or external obscurity.” His work is to Understand “the
existing Universe in accordance with His own Mind.” The Magus is the “Master of Magick
... his will is entirely free from internal division or external opposition; His work is to
create a new Universe in accordance with His Will.” The Magus does this by uttering a
Word of an Aeon, or by making “personal progress equivalent to that of a ‘Word of the
Aeon.’” Beyond the Magus is the Ipsissimus (“his very utmost self’) who is “the Master of
145
all modes of existence... entirely free from internal or external necessity. His work is to
destroy all tendencies to construct or to cancel such necessities.” Further Crowley says:
“The Ipsissimus has no relation as such to any Being: He has no will in any direction, and
no consciousness of any kind involving duality, for Him all is accomplished...”(54)
The Black Brothers, or Brothers of the Left-Hand path, are those "... who ‘shut
themselves up,’ who refuse their blood to the cup, who have trampled Love in the Race for
self-aggrandizemenL”(55) They refuse to exit the Abyss and remain there, retaining then-
own gathered powers. These powers will, according to Crowley, eventually dissipate—
and with than the existence of the Black Brother.(56)
The system of the A.-.A.-. shows a “logical” progression with two virtually obligatory
critical junctures for those who would proceed through the grades normally. The first is the
Ritual of attaining Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. Here the
initiate gains awareness of self and receives the power inherent in this self-knowledge. The
second critical juncture is the experience of the Abyss. Here the initiate must chose the
right-hand path or the left-hand path.
Although Crowley admits to the possibilities of the practice of “Black Magick,” for him
this has little to do with the pursuit of the left-hand path. Whereas in most areas he is
anxious to annihilate the distinctions between categories, such as between the Beast and
Lamb, or Set and Horns— he seems equally anxious to preserve the distinction between
(White) Magick and Black Magick. Any possible explanation for this incongruity is
perhaps to be sought in Crowley’s own character or needs. He has no objection to dealing
with demonic forces,(57) but it is possible for him to explain lack of success in Magick by
positing interference from the "Black Lodge.”(58) Certainly he also could point the finger
at magical rivals (such as Gurdjieff) or former teachers (such as S. L. Mathers) or former
proteges (such as Austin Osman Spare) and call them “Black Brothers” if it suited him.
Vision
It is clear that Crowley’s most ambitions intention in life was the establishment of a
new universal religion— a new Law that would replace Christianity, Judaism, Islam and all
the religions of mankind. His vision was one of universal transformation ushered in by the
“equinox of the gods” helped along by his own work. Crowley would often return to the
theme of the universal progress of humanity. At the same time (e.g. AL 11:25) the Beast
recognized a difference between the “chosen” or elect and the “people” or mob— “which
refuses to admit its deity ”(59) This attitude is typical of Crowley, he wants it both ways
after all. His system is both universalistic, as are the right-hand path religions he sought to
replace, and electoral (elitist), as are the mysteries of antiquity, Gnostic sects, and most
occult organizations.
Was Crowley a Lord of the Left-Hand Path? Crowley himself sends a variety of mixed
signals. He clearly defines what the left-hand path is in his own terms and carefully
explains how he is not a “Black Brother.” So we must take him at his word that he was not
a treader of the left-hand path.
In my opinion the key to Crowley’s attitude can be found in his self-image. He thought
of his “mundane personality” as a fiendish demon— he often called it “the demon
Crowley.” He saw himself as limited and insignificant— but his True Self he saw as god¬
like. So the idea of self- or personality-annihilation and rebirth in the True or Higher Self
appealed to him greatly. Analysis of his life shows, however, that the personality of
Aleister Crowley appeared to be as strong emerging from the Abyss (on 3 December 1909)
as it was going into the Abyss earlier that same year. Of course, our eyes may be deceived.
From the outside looking in it appears that A.C. meets all of the criteria be a Lord of the
Left-Hand Path. He practiced antinoinianism with a vengeance— but within a theory of
strict monism (certainly inspired by his Buddhistic leanings). Self-deification is his goal
clearly, as he defines it in his own initiatory system. It is fundamental to his work that this
deification is that of the individual self and that it is accomplished by the will of the
146
individual magician by means of Magick. So, as I have established the criteria, Crowley is
a Lord of the Left-Hand Path— but not by his own estimation or evaluation.
One of the major theorists and practitioners of the left-hand path in the latter 20th
century. Dr. Michael Aquino, analyses Crowley’s vision of himself and his work as being
confused— or “perplexed.”(60) Given Crowley’s criteria for initiation in the A.*.A.-,
coupled with Crowley’s continued, and even heightened, manifestation of self and
personality, a paradox exists. At the level of Magister Templi the individual self and its
capacity to discriminate between one thing and another (i.e. logical thought) has
supposedly been annihilated— how then can he “Understand the existing Universe in
accordance with His own Mind”? (61) Dr. Aquino writes: ’The inevitable conclusion is that
there is no Right-Hand Path to the initiatory level of Magister Templi (at least not as
prescribed by the original G. -.D.-. and A.*. A.-.). There is only the Left-Hand Path, and it
is fraught with danger— not a one time crossing of the Abyss test, but a continuous peril
that exists from the moment the individual completely realizes him-Self as a Magister.”(62)
Aquino’s analysis is essentially that Crowley was a Black Brother who, because of his
unique position and Aeonic Work, could not clearly see that fact himself.
The Saturnians
and
Gregor A. Gregorius
The Beast was a goat who spawned a thousand young. Sects and orders based on
Crowley’s system — or inspired by it — have been numerous in the latter half of this
century. The most stable and continuous of the groups independent of Crowley’s direct
legacy is the Fratemitas Satumi (FS) — the Brotherhood of Sanim — led from 1927 to
1963 by Gregor A. Gregorius, whose mundane name was Eugen Grosche. The FS
appears even more eclectic then Crowley’s systems, and it seems also to embrace the
traditional symbols of darkness even more enthusiastically than the Beast did.
Sources for the study of the FS have been limited and unsystematic, especially for
those who do not read German. My book Fire and Ice was actually the first systematic
treatment of the FS in any language. My study may be limited by the particular viewpoint
of an author standing outside die system being treated inevitably brings to a subject Other
than this English language discussion, there are several collections of original documents.
The most extensive of these is the complete collection of the Blatter fur angewandte
0 okkulte ) Lebenskunst published between 1950 and 1963. There are also the Magische
Briefe, many of which have been reprinted by the German occult publisher Schikowski.
Because a former Grand Master sold manuscripts of Fratemitas Satumi material to a
German professor of folklore in 1968, who in turn published them, a floodgate of original
FS documentation and some limited secondary material opened on the German market.(63)
Some of this is valuable, especially a study called Die Fratemitas Satumi : Eine satum-
magische Loge written by Aythos, who is in fact another former Grand Master Jananda (=
W. Jantschik).
History of the F§
Fratemitas Satumi tradition holds that the Brotherhood has roots going back to
Scandinavian lodges and to the Polish magician and mathematician Joseph Maria HoSne-
Wronski (1776-1853),(64) but its direct ancestry goes back only as far as the Pansophical
Lodge and the O.T.O.
The Pansophical Lodge was headed by Heinrich Tranker (Recnartus) and counted
among its initiates Eugen Grosche (Gregor A. Gregorius), Karl Genner (Satumus) and
Albin Grau (Pacitus). Grau was an architect, and set-designer, for the German UFA studio
in Berlin where he worked on the film Nosferatu , among others. Germer was to go on to
become more closely associated with Aleister Crowley eventually becoming his magical
heir. Tranker had derived his Masonic organizational authority from Theodor Reuss
(Merlin/ Peregrinus) who was “Outer Head” of the O.T.O. from 1905 to 1922. In the years
just after the First World War Tranker founded a variety of magical organizations, some of
147
which seem to have existed on paper only, and all of which had “pansophical” in then-
names. The background of these organizations seems to be one in common with the
O.T.O. . ,
The O.T.O. itself derived its organizational lineage from charters obtained from an
English Mason named John Yarker. A Viennese industrialist and Mason, Karl Kellner, is
said to have founded the O.T.O. around 1896, but no mention of it occurs in print before
1904.(65) Kellner is supposed to have pioneered a system of sexual magic. According to
tradition he is said to have travelled to die east, like the fabled Christian Rosenkreuz, and
learned the techniques from Masters in India and Arabia. It appears more likely that his
teachings were derived from a French branch of the school of the American occultist
Paschal Beverly Randolph.(66)
These two already closely related streams of German occultism came together for a time
at the so-called Waida Conference in 1925. This meeting was held at Tranker’s home near
Waida, Germany and its purpose was to bring Aleister Crowley together with German
leaders that they might accept his Law of Thelema. The conference was only a qualified
success for Crowley. The participants accepted the Law of Thelema, although some shortly
thereafter rejected it Gregorius then went on in 1928 to establish the Fratemitas Satumi as
an order which accepted and worked with Crowley's Thelemic Law, but which remained
completely independent of involvement with the Beast personally.
The work of the order was, of course, interrupted by the Nazi years. In 1950
Gregorius reorganized the FS and it enjoyed a very productive phase from that time to the
time of his death in 1963. After that there was a period of unsettled leadership until 1971
when the Brotherhood reconstituted itself. The magical philosophy I examine here is that
presided over by Gregor A. Gregorius between 1928 and 1963.
Saturnian Cosmology
The cosmological doctrine of the Fratemitas Satumi — or its Cosmosophy — is based
on dualities and the interplay of dualities: light and darkness, inner and outer, male and
female. This echoes Crowley’s “monistic dualism” and his polarity between Hadit and
Nuit The synthesis of polar opposites is a much stronger theme in Saturnian teachings then
it is in the writings of Crowley.
From the theories of the “heretical” astrophysicist Hans Horbiger (1860-1931)
Gregorius gleaned a doctrine of the cosmic tension between centripetal and centrifugal
forces— between the forces of repulsion/expansion and attraction/contraction. The center
of the cosmos is symbolized by the center of the sun, while the outer limits of it is
embodied in the orbit of the planet Saturn. (In ancient astronomy/astrology Saturn was the
outermost planet as the others were not visible.)
Saturnian teachings give primacy to darkness. Darkness is said to precede light and to
provide a matrix for the manifestation of the light- Without darkness there is no light!(67)
The “dualism” of the FS is not on that seeks to destroy one pole in favor of the other, but
rather it seeks to go beyond the polarities through experience of both extremes.
Gregorius places more emphasis on astrological, or “astrosophical” factors than
Crowley. For Gregorius the New Aeon was to be as much determined by the transition into
the much anticipated Age of Aquarius as by the Equinox of the Gods perceived by the
Beast, In traditional medieval astrology the zodiacal sign of Aquarius is ruled by the
p lane tary force of Saturn. In modem forms the planet Uranus is given primary rulership
over that sign. The Kabbalah played a significantly smaller role in Saturnian teachings
about the nature and structure of the cosmos than it did in the G.*.D.*., A.-.A.-, or the
O.T.O.
For the Saturnian the cosmos seems to be a much harsher, more severe, place to
survive in than it does to the more “orthodox” Thelemite. The Law of Thelema was in fact
modified or extended by Gregorius to conclude: Love is the Law, Compassionless Love
(G. Mitleidlose Hebe). This compassionless, or “pitiless,” love is derived in part from
Liber AL:
148
We have nothing with the outcast and the unfit:
let them die in their misery. For they feel not
Compassion is the vice of kings: stamp down the
wretched and the weak: this is the law of the
strong: this is our law and the joy of the world.
(ALII: 21)
But the Saturnian formula seems more directly based on the philosophy of Friedrich
Nietzsche (1844-1900) who, in his seminal work Also sprach Zarathustra (Thus spoke
Zarathustra) equated pity (G. Mitleid) with self-annihi1ation.(68) For the Saturnian rejection
of “pity” is the magical equivalent of the rejection of self-a nnihil ation. In looking at the
Saturnian initiatory path it will be noted that there was no hint of the Abyss phenomenon or
the exhortation to destroy the mundane self so that a new (me may be reborn from its ashes.
Humanity in the Dark Light of Saturn
In an address entitled "Der Mensch in seiner hochsten Erkenntnisreife” (Humanity in its
Fullest Intellectual Maturity)(69) delivered at the Easter Lodge of the FS in 1961,
Gregorius discussed the nature of humanity in a way reminiscent of Pico della Mirandola’s
"Oration.” As an individual being Gregorius sees the human as an entity caught between
two opposing poles of life or creativity and death or destruction, between knowledge and
ignorance. But Gregorius does not see these as "good” versus “evil.” He sees both poles as
necessary to the evolution or initiation of the individual. Only an elite, however, will ever
see beyond the dualities or will be able to utilize both poles for the evolution of the self.
Ignorance or "Agnosis” (G. Nichtwissen ), when recognized as such by the subject, is a
true spur to real knowledge or understanding. Here we are reminded of the declaration of
the oracle at Delphi that Socrates was the wisest of men in all Greece because the claimed
“to know nothing.” All knowledge begins with an assumption of ignorance. But the
ignorance is like a great weight on the spirit and soul— only the strong will be able to use
this resistance to enlightenment for the purpose of initiation. The all-pervasive ignorance of
the masses is a testing mechanism. The masses incapable of true Knowledge (gnosis)
become prisoners of unconsciousness where external god-forms are projected in order to
allay the humans’ fear of having to doubt The Saturnian elite, however, recognize that they
are their own gods— they must be for there simply are no others. Gregorius writes that the
Saturnian initiate “should elevate himself upon the pedestal of a god-like entity, despite his
profound kn owledge that there is no personal God— just as there is no Devil. (^ p. 4)
Gregorius poetically expressed this idea in his 1943 poem “Thou art Thine Own God :
1. Thou must affirm the God in Thee, for every
doubt takes power from Thee.
Every hour of Thy divine knowledge brings
Thee a step higher in Thy journey.
2. Thou canst unfold the spark,
that God bestowed on Thee, to a pure flame
that makes worlds fall and rise again,
God is in Thee! — Thou art Thyself God!
3. Thus Thou canst have Gods enthroned in Thee
build altars, ignite sacrificial flames,
for every dream — and form of thought is
Thy power,
and every force of desire takes a form and
shape.
149
4. Thus art Thou the shaper of transcendental
worlds,
imaginative creator of Thine own realm.
Thou art priest, magus, royal lord
and prince in Thy soul’s expanse.
5. Cyprus groves stand round Thy palaces of
thought
and blue waves lap at the marble steps
and ships fare out upon the seas,
for Thee, who wearest the purple.
6. The Earth is Thy sorrow that shaped the
knowledge
and bitter fruits of Thy Golgatha—
And nevertheless the call rings out to Thee:
Lo! I am here!
Saturnian “Theology”
Despite the insistence on the initiated individual as die true measurement of the divine,
certain apparently objective figures of god-like dimensions play a part in the Saturnian
cosmology. These apparent divinities are, however, not gods in the traditional sense. They
are either objective concrete phenomena (following the way Crowley described the true
nature of Nuit and Hadit) or psychogonic projections of individual or collective human
minds.
To the former category belong entities such as Satumus — the creative agency of the
cosmos, or demiurge as well as Lucifer and Satana/s— the so-called higher and lower
octaves of the Saturnian sphere. To the latter category belongs the GOTOS, the egregore of
the Fratemitas Satumi. This entity has been built up through the ages as a result of
Saturnian magical work by individual magicians and the FS as a whole. The Grand Master
of the order stands in a special relationship with this entity as it is identified with the 33o of
the order— the Gradus Ordinis Templi Orientis Satumi (G.O.T.O.S.).
The archetypes such as Satumus and Lucifer become models for the evolution of the
magician. They are the patterns of existence in the objective universe which initiates use to
shape their own paths of transformation. But the entities that are the pure products of hu¬
man will are utilized as tools for the creation of certain magical effects. The GOTOS holds
together and empowers the FS in a general way and lends its power to individual members
who know the keys to gaining access to that power. The creation of such egregores or
psychogones (entities generated by the human psyche or will) is a common magical
technique in the Fratemitas Satumi even on a much smaller scale. In many ways the
magical teachings of the FS seem to be a return to the extremely archaic practices of priests,
like the Vedic Brahmins, who worship the gods which they themselves have created.
The Initiatory Path of Saturn
The structural framework of initiation in the Fratemitas Satumi is provided by the 33
degrees based on the system of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. This becomes a
vast training curriculum for the acquisition of magical s kills and techniques.(70) More than
the systems of Aleister Crowley that of the FS and Gregor A. Gregorius emphasizes a wide
range of magical and meditative techniques and methods as being necessary to progress.
This progress is seen as a continuum through the 33 degrees with no annihilation of the self
being a part of it
The path of Saturn is constantly being called one that is both lonely and fraught with
danger and suffering— all of which is taken on as a matter of self-determined volition.
There is intentional suffering, as Gurdjieff might call it The role of antinomianism in the
Fratemitas Satumi curriculum is great Not only is there an emphasis on dark and
foreboding images and experiences, which is meant to weed out those unfit for Saturnian
initiation, but there is also the common training principle of going against the gram of the
150
initiate’s natural inclinations. For example, if the person is naturally oriented toward
intellectual and analytical pursuits, that person might be directed to emphasize emotive and
intuitive methods in training.(71)
The magical methodology created by Gregorius for the FS hinges on experience and
knowledge — the experience of the Saturnian life and of the sacraments of the Brotherhood
and knowledge of the Saturnian “Cosmosophy” or wisdom concerning the cosmic order.
Solitude is cultivated so as to isolate the true subject of the transformation— the individual
self. The transformational process follows along a path defined by the 33 degrees leading
from Earth to the core of the Saturnian sphere. In that sphere, according to Saturnian
Cosmosophy, is the true reality of the Solar Logos. The Sun is the polar opposite of
Saturn. But because the core on one extreme contains the essence of its opposite, the path
to Saturn is the surest path to the Sun. In this way the alchemical “lead” is transformed into
“gold.” Standard western magical symbolism ascribes lead to Saturn and gold to the Sun.
This is the initiatory application of the Cosmosophical doctrines of polarization.
The chief function of the Brotherhood itself in this process for the individual is that the
group builds and maintains a constant bond with the Saturnian sphere in the form of the
egregore GOTOS. The egregore is the product of concentrated collective thought forms
built up throughout the years by the FS. The bond with this egregore both aids in the “re¬
polarization” of the individual toward the Saturnian sphere and provides energy for
effecting practical magical ends.
The Saturnian Vision
Because the Fratemitas Satumi has as one of its main teachings that the world is
passing into an Aquarian-Uranian Age a fairly developed picture of the envisioned future
emerges. It only bears a fleeting resemblance to the much publicized “Age of Aquarius”
made popular in the 1960s and 1970s. The astrological sign Aquarius is traditionally ruled
by Saturn with his dark and distant aspects. Only in more modem rimes, with the discovery
of the planets outside the orbit of Saturn, was Aquarius assigned to the planet Uranus.
This Aquarian-Uranian Age, ruled by Saturn, will be one in which a spiritual elite will
be increasingly powerful. But because the initiatory process of this Saturnian spiritual elite
takes place on a very individualized basis, cooperation or fellowship between and among
initiates will be a great challenge. This is part of the significance of the Brotherhood of
Saturn itself. The individuals seek solitude for their spiritual development, but the physical
basis needed to sustain the spiritual solitude requires social cooperation. One unrealized,
yet de finite part of the Saturnian vision was the establishment of a “monastery” for initiates.
This monastery would serve as an educational center (and vacation site) for most members
of the order, while it would be staffed by a group of high grade initiates who would live
there.(72) The monastery would provide rite land of physical and spiritual isolation
conducive to Saturnian initiation.
Gregor A. Gregorius
and
The Left-Hand Path
As compared to the writings of Aleister Crowley, those of Gregorius are much more
filled with direct evidence of a self-conception of his Fratemitas Satumi as being something
of a “dark brotherhood.” The association of Saturn with Lucifer/Satan (as the higher and
lower octave of the planetary sphere ) is freely made and antmomianism is even a part of
the training theory promoted by Gregorius. Of course, magic is the chief tool in FS practice
and this tool is used mainly for the purpose of initiation or transformation of the brother or
sister through the 33 degrees of the Saturnian system. Finally, Gregorius overtly promoted
the idea of self-deification as the end of the Saturnian path. That this is a highly
individualized path, and an essentially solitary one, is emphasized by the nature
traditionally ascribed to Saturn. Perhaps more than any other single figure in the first half
of the 20th century, Gregor A. Gregorins exemplifies a true Lord of the Left-Hand Path.
151
Austin Osman Spare:
The Lover of the Self
One of the most uncanny figures of the occult revival was Austin Osman Spare. Spare
is odd in that he founded no organized group, wrote little — and what he did write was
often obscure and muddled — and was most particularly a graphic artist, not a thinker or
philosopher. Spare’s magic wells up from the unconscious, from a realm of images
swirling in the right hemisphere of the brain.
Perhaps the main reason for discussing Spare as a possible Lord of the Left-Hand Path
is that apparently Aleister Crowley once called him a “Black Brother.” The reason Crowley
gave for this is that he thought Spare’s practice amounted to a “cultivation of self-love
through pleasure.”(73) This comment alone — if it is reliable — necessitate the
examination of Spare’s ideas for this study, A major problem with the study of Spare’s
magic is that more has been written and spoken about it than Spare himself ever put into
words. We often remain dependent on the interpretations of others — especially those of
Kenneth Grant — for some important data. Grant too categorized Spare as a magician of
the left-hand path, which Grant defines as the “path of those who use the energies of sex
for gaining control of unseen worlds and their denizens.”(74) This definition, which seems
influenced by Buddhistic attitudes, is far too limited and simplistic for our study. But it is
yet another assessment of Spare as a practitioner of the left-hand path.
Spare was bom in 1886, the son of a Loudon policeman. He became a graphic artist
and edited and published several magazines and books between 1905 and 1927. His most
important works are Earth : Inferno (1905), A Book of Satyrs (1909), The Book of
Pleasure (Self-Love) (1913), The Focus of Life (1921) and The Anathema ofZos: The
Sermons to Hypocrites (1927). In 1910 he joined Crowley’s A.-.A.-,, but soon dropped
out. Spare became increasingly alienated from “normal” society so that by 1930 he had
completely dropped out of his usual circles. Until his death in 1956 he lived in a South
London slum.
Kenneth Grant met him in 1949 and knew him until the time of his death, whereupon
Grant became his literary executor. Spare, chiefly through Grant’s efforts, became more
well-known in death than he ever had in life. Not only has Grant’s “branch” of the O.T.O.
been influenced by Spare’s magical ideas, but two other contemporary orders owe
significant debts to Spare’s “system.” There were the Temple ov Psychik Youth headed by
Genesis P-Orage and the “Illuminates of Thanateros” (IOT) once headed by Peter Carroll.
Spare’s cosmology and theology are one and the same because he has a pantheistic
view of reality. For Spare there is a universal Self called Kia which is also the “primal
power” of the universe analogous to the Chinese Tao or the Kabbalistic am soph. Spare
theorized that the Kia became bored in its monotonous existence and so “condensed itself,”
or part of itself into “matter.” The planets are used by Kia as staging grounds for the
evolution of life. Living creatures are thought to be the “sensory organs” of Kia. The whole
physical universe is seen as the product of Kia’s will to generate a love object within
itself— Kia’s will is that of self-love. Therefore conscious human existence has as its
highest purpose the generation of experience for Kia to enjoy. “We love Kia by self-
love.”^) When self-love dominates in the awareness of a human being that person’s
motivation is harmonized with that of Kia itself.
So in Spare’s view humans are not creatures separate from the natural order, but merely
sentient extensions of an absolute reality otherwise cut off from experience of itself. The
tack of mankind is not to differentiate itself from the natural order through the love of the
individual self, but to imitate Kia’s cosmic self-love by means of mankind’s own
communion with the unconscious. Spare, following contemporary psychological theories
of Freud and Jung, held that a person has a conscious mind — which is ignorant of
experience of Kia — and an unconscious mind. The latter component is the link between
152
the person and Kia— or reality. The unconscious is thought to be inhabited by “elemental
automata” or “atavisms” with their ultimate sources in the deepest levels of Kia. These
psychic atavisms are said to be the actual means for Kia’s self-awareness. When humans
gain experience of these atavisms, Kia gains wider experience in the world of matter.
Spare, like many magicians contemporary with him, was in many ways a mate rialis t In
Earth : Inferno (1904) he implies that the realm of the flesh, or the natural order, is all that
really exists. Thoughts to the contrary are illusions.
From a left-hand path viewpoint the most interesting aspect of Spare’s system is not his
highly subjective cosmology and “theology,” but his magical technology. The cosmology
is essentially a right-hand path system— albeit an idiosyncratic or solipsistic one. But his
method of working his own magic is so subjective that it must be considered an exercise in
at least one kind of left-hand path practice if not theory. Spare created his own personal
magical system independent of any known tradition. In addition there is no evidence that he
really tried to imply that his system was anything other than just this own personal
idiosyncratic system with no necessary universal value. Spare created a totally arbitrary
magical symbology. This involved his representational graphic art-work and a peculiar set
of symbols he called the “Alphabet of Desire.” He never presented or explained this
“Alphabet” in a complete or systematic way. It is a series of glyphs or ideograms each
representing an eternal identifiable element in Spare’s own unconscious.
Spare’s method of linkin g the conscious mind (the material world) with the unconscious
(Kia) was to create images consciously and then suppress them into the unconscious where
they must be forgotten by the conscious mind. Then they will be free to affect the “flow of
Fate” and cause the desired effects in the material or conscious world. This process is what
Spare called ‘"making the desire organic” or “fleshing” it
An example of the way Spare “fleshed” desires is provided by the magical technique of
“sigilization.” This involves the creation of unique graphic forms to act as anchors to sink
desires into the deep unconscious and to fix them by an unseen chain to the material world.
The most intelligible explanation of Spare’s use of various kinds of sigils is found in Frater
U.-.,D.-.’s Practical Sigil Magic.
Ultimately the only reason Spare would deserve Crowley’s designation of him as a
“Black Brother” can be found in his practice of creating an entirely subjective, personal and
unique cosmology and technology for dealing with it In this regard Spare practiced a
separation from the environment even if he did not promote this idea in theory. In Spare’s
theory self-love is not a turning away from the absolute (Kia) but the only possible direct
way to embrace it
The mam problem in interpreting the left-hand path contents of Spare’s ideas is that we
are sometimes led astray by the interpretations of other writers. Spare wrote relatively little
himself and often what he wrote was unclear and ambiguous, he was a highly
undisciplined and virtually unedited writer. But sometimes when reading Spare it is
difficult to shake off the nagging feeling that the reader is simply trying to unravel the
ravings of a man half-mad by his own design.
Austin Osman Spare makes for an interesting comparison with Anton LaVey. Both are
essentially creative artists— and both artistically create their subjective experiences based
on a carnal mysterium. Spare tended to project the vision more and more inward while
LaVey projects his outward.
The Fourth Way
and the Left-Hand Path
If we were to measure the magnitude of “occult leaders” by the greatness achieved by
those whom they taught or in some positive way influenced, then certainly the greatest such
teacher of the 20th century would be Georgei Ivanovitch Gurdjieff. He was the principal
teacher of P. D. Ouspensky and several others who went on to form their own independent
groups within what is known as the Work. (See Figure 8.2.) Gurdjieff s teachings have
153
formatively influenced people as diverse as architect Frank Lloyd Wright, painter Georgia
O’Keefe, film-makers Alexandro Jodorosky and Peter Brooks, authors Katherine
Mansfield, J. B. Priestly and Katherine Hume, as well as musicians as diverse as Thomas
de Hartmann, Alexander de Salzmann and Robert Fripp.(76) Gurdjieff, despite his
unabashedly “esoteric” status, has even exerted direct influence on some schools of
“orthodox” psychology, for example Gestalt , and his ideas are often held in high regard in
the academic world.
Gurdjieff is also an unusual figure in the occult revival because when he came upon the
scene publicly in Russia for the first time, it was for the expressed purpose of combating
the “occult revival” which he characterized as a “psychosis.”(77)
At the same time Mr. G., as he is often affectionately referred to by his followers, is
generally shrouded with a mantle of sinister reputation and dark mystery himself. Like
others with cultural roots in the lands of eastern Christianity, he seemed to feel little
compunction about occasionally associating himself the “the benevolent Devil.” Gurdjieff s
greatest literary work, Beelzebub’s Tales to his Grandson , again places Mr. G. in the
Devil’s lineage. Such references would, however, be nothing but poetic flourishes or
deliberate attempts to obfuscate the hidden truths in the absence of more positive evidence.
Gurdjieff also has his share of detractors. Louis Pauwels Gurdjieff (1972) is a collection of
such sinister depictions of Mr. G. He was supposed to have been involved with Hitler and
the Nazis — as well as with Joseph Stalin.(78) He is supposed to have been able to
stimulate an orgasmic response in women by his gaze alone.(79)
But despite his contemporary sinister reputation, or perhaps because of it, even his
detractors often ended in extoling his power and sometimes even in carrying on his
essential teachings. Mr. G. often ended his association with former pupils in an abrupt or
offensive way— he had to drive them away in disillusionment in order for them to gain
their own independent existence. Behavior patterns such as these are just one more obstacle
in the path of any would-be biographer of G. I. Gurdjieff.(80)
Figure 8.2: The Branches of the Tradition
British Groups
154
Remarkable Men
The Lives of G. I. Gurdjieff and P. D. Ouspeusty
Gurdjieff was probably bom in 1874,(81) perhaps on January 13 (New Year’s Day in
the Old Style Russian calendar) in Alexandropol, later called Leninakan in the present day
Republic of Armenia, But even these basic data are controversial and subject to
mythologizing. The whole of Gurdjieffs early life (until 1912) is shrouded in mystery and
self-created myth. The most objective biographical treatment seems to be that of James
Webb, The Harmonious Circle (1980).
His mother was Armenian and his father was an emigre from Greece. The family’s
original name was probably Georgiades, which was Armenian!red to Gurdjian, and when
the region became part of the Russian Empire the name was Slavicized to Gurdjieff. In
1877 the family moved to Kars, closer to the Turkish border. It is there that Gurdjieff grew
up.
Gurdjieffs earliest teacher appears to have been his father who was an ashokh — one
steeped in traditional ancestral lore. During his formative years he was exposed to a rich
mixture of Greek, Armenian and Russian Orthodox Christian spirituality. These eastern
sects of Christianity are not only more open to what might be called in the west “occult”
ideas and practices, but are also much less intolerant of divergent spiritual paths. It is even
possible that Gurdjieff spent some time tr ainin g for the priesthood in the Greek Orthodox
tradition.(82)
Around the year 1892, when he would have been 18 years old, Gurdjieff underwent a
turning point in his life. He decided to seek knowledge and truth no matter what the cost
Shortly after this, in 1895, Gurdjieff tells us that a group of young fellow investigators
formed an association they called the “Seekers for Truth.” It would also have been about
this time that he would have been eligible to be conscripted into military service for the
Tsar. There is good evidence to suggest that the young Gurdjieff fulfilled his military
obligation to the Tsar in the field of espionage and later even diplomacy in foreign lands to
the south and east of Russia.(83) This period of service most likely lasted from 1892 to
1904 or perhaps 1910. He was wounded by gun-fire on at least three occasious during this
time, the first time in Crete in 1896 while he was apparently involved with Greek
nati o nalis t, interests on that island opposing the Turkish forces there.
Most of Gurdjieffs travels and assignments seem to have been concentrated in the
east — in the regions of present-day Turkestan, Afghanistan, Tibet and Mongolia. It even
appears that, under an assumed identity, he became an intimate of the court of the Dalai
i jima in Lhasa. These activities in behalf of Russia and Tibet continued until at least 1904.
From that time to around 1910 it is said he studied hypnotism and healing arts in the central
Asian region of Turkestan. The timing of his return to Russia from central Asia coincides
with the Chinese invasion of Tibet in 1910 which effectively put an end to the interest
Russian intelligence had in that country.
With his career in the intelligence service at an end, Gurdjieff, at the probable age of
36, began to bring together what he had learned over the past 18 years. He moved to St
Petersburg in 1910 and in 1912 began his new career in teaching his unique system to a
select circle of pupils. In 1914 he moved to Moscow, and in the spring of 1915 he met a
man who would become his most influential student— P. D. Ouspensky.
The “orthodox” Gurdjieffian mythology would have it that Mr. G. spent the years up
until 1910 traveling from teacher to teacher, especially in the Middle East, eventually
becoming highly initiated in a major international Sufistic brotherhood. This brotherhood
then sent him to undertake the enlightenment of the west using a method and system
appropriate to the present culture of the Occident
From the truly objective viewpoint — using the word “objective” as Gurdjieff himself
might have used it — it does not matter which version, if either, is factually true. It matters
only which one brings the individual subject of the search for truth closer to his goal.
155
By the winter of 1916 the chaos caused by the First World War and the onset of
revolutionary activity prompted Gurdjieff to move south with his students to the ancient
Armenian town of Essentuki on the northern side of the Caucus mountains. There they
remained together through the difficult circumstances occasioned by the Bolshevik
Revolution of 1917. In January 1919 they moved on to TifUs on the southern side of the
Caucuses near Gurdjieff s family home. There he founded the Institute for the Harmonious
Development of Man— but the harsh political conditions forced it to be dissolved in the
spring of 1920. By June of that same year it was clear that Gurdjieff and his pupils would
have to immigrate to the west as so many other subjects of the Russian Empire had been
forced to do. First they went to Constantinople (Istanbul), where the Institute was reopened
for a year. But this was only a temporary stop-over for a more ambitious mission to
western Europe. The group’s first stop was in Berlin, where they stayed from the summer
of 1921 to the summer of 1922.
During the stay in Germany there was contact with the artistic communities of Berlin
and Hellerau (near Dresden)— where Gurdjieff briefly attempted to gain control over a
facility earlier abandoned by the founder of “Eurhythmies” (Rhythmische Gymnastik ),
Jaques-Dalcroze.(84) There is no evidence to show that Gurdjieff had any contact with the
then subversive National Socialists— any contact with members of that movement would
have come during Gurdjieff s many trips to Germany in the late 1920s.(85)
Paris became Gurdjieff s final destination in die west, as it had for so many other
refugees from the Bolshevik Revolution. In 1922 he bought as estate, later named the
Prieure in Fontainebleau near Paris. Here his Institute was again established and it was here
that Gurdjieff s reputation in the west was made. Students came from everywhere, but
especially from America.
One famous visitor was Aleister Crowley, who showed up as a weekend guest in
1925. After Gurdjieff had fulfilled his obligations as a host he ejected Crowley with a
flurry of invectives. Perhaps Mr. G.’s ire had been raised when Crowley told a group of
children at the Prieure that he was raising his own child “to be a devil.”(86)
Despite the fact that many students were attracted to Gurdjieff s teachings, his manner
and means of teaching drove almost as many away after some period. Ouspensky finally
broke with him in 1924, and his most dynamic western pupil, A.R. Orage, was driven off
by 1931. Even the de Hartm anns , who had been with Gurdjieff since the beginning of his
teaching in Russia, were driven off — all by impossible, irrational demands made on them
by their “Master.” All of this led to financial disaster for the Prieure, which eventually had
to be sold in 1933. From then until the outbreak of World War II, Gurdjieff lived in transit
in various locals in Europe and the United States. It was also during this period that he
wrote his major literary productions.
Strangely enough, when war did erupt in Europe, Gurdjieff returned to Paris where he
lived out the war years mostly under German occupation. According to him he “sold rugs,
owned a company that made false eyelashes — and made ‘deals’ with many people ...” to
get along. This is just one more of the verifiable facts concerning Gurdjieff s life
and political dealings that invite sensational speculation.
After the war he again took up an itinerant existence teaching certain pupils and
co ntin uing to write and rewrite Beelzebub's Tales. Gurdjieff died on October 29,1949.
Just two years earlier, on October 2, 1947, Gurdjieff’s most influential single student,
Pyotr Demianovitch Ouspensky, had died in London. Ouspensky’s life had been vastly
different from that of Gurdjieff. was bom in Moscow on March 5, 1878 (Old Style) to a
well educated, westernized family. His father was an officer in the Russian Survey Service
and an amateur mathematician- His mother was a painter and an amateur student of French
and Russian literature. In 1888 his parents took young Pyotr to France to see the Paris
Exposition.
Ouspensky appears to have been one of those personality types — common among
geniuses and “okkultnik ninkompoops” alike — (and the two types should not be
156
confused) — who can muster no motivation to learn and study things that do not interest
them intensely at that very moment The result of this in Ouspensky’s case is that he failed
out of university preparatory school when he was about 16 years old. He then became an
auditor in lectures at Moscow University. He read Nietzsche about this time and was
greatly influenced by the German philosopher’s ideas of the overman. From 1896 to 1905
Ouspensky traveled widely seeking hidden knowledge — his “search for the miraculous”
had begun. At the age of 27 he began his career as a journalist writing for both newspapers
and magazines. In 1907 he discovered Theosophy, with which he was never quite
satisfied. It surely lacked the precision he was looking for.
The social milieu of literary Symbolism and the avant garde became Ouspensky’s
accustomed existence. He became a free-lance journalist and lectured on occult subjects in
the years between 1909 and 1912. In 1912 his first book, Tertium Organum was
published. This is a valuable record of the nature and quality of his thought before
exposure to Gurdjieff s ideas. He spent most of the years 1913 and 1914 in India, where
he visited the headquarters of the Theosophical Society in Benares. He found nothing
miraculous there.
Another “pre-Gurdjieffian” work. Talks with a Devil , written in 1914 in India and
Cylon is of interest to us because in it we learn of Ouspensky’s particular attitudes toward
the Devil and evil rooted in Slavic folklore as well as in the spirit of his own time and place.
For Ouspensky the Devil is the embodiment of Matter. Logic and science are his tools and
he uses these to entrap mankind into remaining enslaved to Matter. The Devil could be said
not to exist in any real sense— but to be the creation of man through ignorance of the
nature of matter and the lack of knowledge concerning the reality beyond material
appearances. In this metaphor Ouspensky is firmly on the side of God. as an e mbod iment
of spirituality and against the Devil who is the embodiment of GREAT MATTER. (87)
Ouspensky’s attitudes can be compared to those of his contemporary countryman, Lenin,
who took the other side in this cosmological debate.
Upon his return to Russia in the following year he met Gurdjieff and became one of his
pupils. Intensive work with Gurdjieff lasted until 1918 when a combination of
revolutionary chaos and some misgivings caused him to go his separate way during the
migrations Gurdjieff and his students made before eventually settling at the Prieure.
Ouspensky finally immigrated to England in August of 1921 where he at once began
teaching the ideas of Gurdjieff. He gathered students around himself and set up a school
that would pursue a course independent from that of Gurdjieff himself. Although
Ouspensky’s school was essentially “Gurdjieffian ” he did tend to attempt to reduce
Gurdjieff s teachings to generally intelligible principles. But in the last weeks of
Ouspensky’s life it is reported that he repudiated Gurdjieff s teachings as a whole and
advised his students to make a fresh start in their individual quests.(88)
The “orthodox” Gurdjieffian evaluation of the split between Ouspensky and Mr. G.
(although this reason is nowhere made explicit) is that Ouspensky wanted to reduce the
“system” to general principles which is impossible because the “system” is only applicable
to individual persons, times and places as determined at critical moments by a living
teacher— a Man Who Knows. The major problem with this interpretation is that it leaves
the whole Gurdjieffian movement — or “the Work” — in a hopeless situation upon the
death of their Master. This would be at least one reason for Gurdjieff uttering his reputed
last words: “I’m leaving you all in a fine mess!” to his followers at his death-bed.
Sources of Study
Many of Gurdjieff s students, and their students, have written copiously on ‘The
Work.” Perhaps the best general introduction is Kathleen R. Speeth’s The Gurdjieff Work
(1976), while the best in-depth introduction to the basic ideas remains Ouspensky’s In
Search of the Miraculous (1939). Several other studies by Ouspensky continue to be
invaluable for understanding Gurdjieff s basic system. These are A New Model of the
Universe (1931), The Psychology of Man’s Possible Evolution (1947) and a posthumous
157
collection of shorter works and lectures, The Fourth Way (1957). The direct approach to
Gurdjieff through his own writings: Herald of the Coming Good (1933), Beelzebub’s
Tales to His Grandson (1949), Meetings with Remarkable Men (1963), and a collection of
early folks included in a collection entitled Views from the Real World (1973), and Life Is
Only Real Then , When “I Am ” (1975) would be bewildering without the guidance of either
secondary sources or a teacher in the Work. This is only to be expected since all of
Gurdjieffs own works were written with the main intention that they would be read as a
part of guided work within his system.
The Organization of the Work
Before Mr. G.’s death, of course, the true center of the Gurdjieff Work could be easily
focused on him and his Institute for the Harmonious Development of Man— at least until
the closing of the Prieure in 1933. But other major teachers of Gurdjieff 7 s system did
emerge, even in his own lifetime. These included P. D. Ouspensky’s group in London as
well as groups around A. R. Grage. After Gurdjieffs death, however, the Work splintered
into many schools with many former students founding their own branches. These are
delineated on the bottom half of the diagram below. The most direct line of the tradition
would appear to be the Gurdjieff Foundations instituted by Jeanne de Salzmann after
Gurdjieffs death. It is said that in the days before his death Mr. G. instructed Mdme. de
Salzmann on how to carry on his Work.
The typical Gurdjieff Foundation group works under the guidance of a teacher and
elder students. They have weekly meetings which usually involve a question/answer format
(students pose questious and the teacher answers them), after a while the physical exercises
or “movements” are studied as well as the writings of Gurdjieff. Also typical of these
groups is that they will acquire some piece of property where the group will labor on the
physical structure of the property as a form of exercise.
There are no provisions for formal initiations or recognitions of various levels of
development in the Gurdjieffian school— although such levels if initiatory development are
theoretically clearly articulated in the system itself. It seems that perhaps behind some of
Mr. G.’s apparent “antics” was the hidden agenda to “shock” advanced students into
venturing out on their own after the Work had done all it could for them. The “initiatory
system” of Gurdjieff verged on the Darwinian as only the fittest survived and thrived
within and beyond the confines of the Work.
The Work
Gurdjieffs Work is predicated on a definite anthropology — and understanding of man
— or “psychology.” But to call it a psychology may be going too far when being very
precise about what Gurdjieff taught Psychology is the understanding of the soul — which
Gurdjieff categorically denied that the “normal ,” average man even has (or needs).
Mr. G. taught that normal man is asleep and completely mechanical in his actions. He is
non-conscious and therefore can do nothing. Events do him, so to speak. “Things just
happen.” Normal man is impotent his “I-consciousness” is fragmented. Normal man is not
just one, but many. Many “Fs” vie for focus in the normal man with no central controller
present "Man is a plurality. Man’s name is legion” (89) (This is an obvious reference to
Mk. 5:9 where Jesus asks a demon in a man what its name is. it answers: “Legion is my
name, because we are many.”) Normal man is mortal , having no soul (or essence) to
survive in the post mortem state. Gurdjieff used the Platonic metaphor of man being
imprisoned(90) — his goal is to escape to freedom. But like Plato’s men in the cave,
normal men need the help of those who have escaped before— they need the help of “Men
Who Know.”
The extraordinary man, the “Fourth Man” is in contrast to the normal man free, and he
is immortal This is due to the fact that he has been able to build up an essence in himself
— or a true soul — which comes from a crystallization of a unified I-consdousness. This
kind of man then becomes potent in the world around him. he can actually do things rather
158
than having things “do” him. The Fourth Man is no longer mechanical (except when he
wills himself to be so) — he is awakened and no longer asleep.
The following table contrasts the characteristics of the “normal man” and the “Fourth
Man.”
Normal Man
asleep
mechanical
impotent
fragmented
mortal
imprisoned —> escape —>
with help of those
who have escaped before
Fourth Man
awakened
non-mechanical
potent
unified
immortal
free
Gurdjieff taught a definite structure of the individual which consists of four “bodies:”
1. Physical or Carnal Body (body)
2. Astral or Natural Body (feelings, desires)
3. Mental or Spiritual Body (mind)
4. Causal or Divine Body (I-consciousness, will)
Not all men have all four bodies. Only the first body is possessed by all. The other
bodies must be developed through the Work of some kind. Even mastery of the Carnal
Body requires Work, however.
There are, according to Gurdjieffian teaching, four ways of working: 1) the Way of the
Fakir, who develops power over and through the Carnal Body, 2) the Way of the Monk,
who develops unity in himself through his emotions or Natural Body, 3) the Way of the
Yogi, who develops power through knowledge and even understanding, i.e. the Spiritual
Body. The Yogi often attempts to enter the fourth state of the Divine Body, but finds this
difficult because equal mastery of the first and second bodies must be gained also. 4) The
Way of the Sly Man— the Fourth Way — in which all sides of the individual — the
physical, emotional, and mental — are developed in a balanced and harmonious way.
These are the only ways of working. Each of these ways develop some or all of man’s
hidden potentialities. This development is not, however, part of a natural law. ‘The law for
man is existence in the circle of mechanical influences, the state of ‘man machine.’ The way
of the development of hidden possibilities in a way against nature , against God” (9 1)
To explain how these four bodies are, or can be linked together in the life of an
individual, Gurdjieff called on an old Indo-European metaphor used by both Plato and the
philosophers of the Indian Upanishads which compares the carnal body to a chariot, the
soul to a horse, the min d to the driver, and the consciousness to the will of the driver.(92)
The problem with normal man is that he is driven by his chariot, rather than having his will
in control. Gurdjieff s position is that normal man is driven by the chariot itself or by the
horse, whereas only the will or consciousness of the Fourth Man is truly in control of the
lower bodies. The contrast between these two extremes is shown by the diagrams in figure
8.3 which Gurdjieff produced for his early students in Russia.(93)
The Seven Men
The Concept of Initiation in the Fourth Way
The aim of development in the Gurdjieffian system is the potent immortality of the
individual . Gurdjieff taught that individuality (a permanent and unchangeable I-
consciousness) and immortality are qualities which can belong to man, but which do not
naturally or normally belong to him.(94) Furthermore, this development is only possible
for a few individuals. This is partly due to the fact that the knowledge needed for such
development is in limited supply.
Mr. G. taught that as far as the mass of humanity is concerned, nature controls the level
of development Man only evolves as it serves the purposes of nature to allow him to
159
evolve. (95) “Changes likely to violate the general requirements of nature can only take
place in separate umts.”(96)
Figure 8.3; The Horse and Driver
‘"Carriage”
...
“Horse”
“Driver 7 ’
“Master”
Body
Feelings and
Mind
I-Consciousness
Desires
or Will
Carnal Body
Natural Body
Spiritual Body
Divine Body
“Humanity neither progresses nor evolves.”(97) As the human species exists for the
needs and purposes of nature on this planet, evolution of the species beyond a certain point
is detrimental and actually impossible.(98) Evolutionary possibilities do exist for separate
individuals only. “Such developments can take place only in the interests of the man
himself against, so to speak, the interests and of the planetary world.”(99) Forces seem to
resist the evolution of large masses, but individuals can slip past the resistance. ‘"What is
possible for individual man is impossible for the masses ”(100) Gurdjieff further insisted
upon the idea that mechanical or unconscious evolution is impossible. “The evolution of
man is the evolution of consciousness. And ‘consciousness ' can not evolve
unconsciously .”(101)
Mr. G.’s system outlining the stages of such development in the Fourth Way comprises
a seven-level scheme which is a systemic part of his over all cosmology. (See Figure 8.4.)
The First Man has his center of gravity, or focus of consciousness in his physical or
instinctive center. The kind of knowledge he can be said to have is imitative. The Second
Man has his focus in the emotional center and the type of knowledge he has is based on his
likes and fondnesses. The Third Man has his center of gravity in his intellectual center and
his knowledge is that of subjective logic. The tendencies toward being one of these three
types is innate in each individual. The Fourth Man develops in an extraordinary way. He
develops a permanent center of gravity and his knowledge is increasingly objective— and it
is knowledge which he must have received from someone at the fifth level. The Fifth Man
makes his knowledge whole and indivisible. AH his knowledge belongs to a unified I-
consciousness. This knowledge must have been gained from a man at the sixth level. The
Sixth Man possesses all knowledge possible for man— but it could still be lost— it too
must have been gained through contact with a Seventh Man. The Seventh Man has
perfected his knowledge which has become both purely objective and permanent with an
immortal Tconsciousness.( 102)
Despite this well articulated system of initiatory development, these levels do not seem
to be recognized within Gurdjieffian schools themselves. The system is a description of a
process but not a scheme for the recognition of “degrees.” It would appear that when,
within a school or group, individuals reach the fourth or fifth level it is inevitable that they
would leave the group to form their own schools. This is perhaps the secret behind the
vigorous and high level spread of Gurdjieffian groups in the world.
Ouspensky clearly indicates that all real initiation is se //-initiation: “Systems and
schools can indicate methods and ways, but no system or school whatever can do for a
man the work he must do himself. Inner growth, a change of being, depend entirely upon
the work a man must do on himself.”(103)
160
Cosmology
Fourth Way cosmology is closely linked with its ‘‘psychology.” Everything that is, or
which develops, does so in a certain way or pattern. In many ways Mr. G.’s system is,
like so many others generated in eastern Europe in the late 19th and early 20th century, a
materialistic one. By this he seems to have meant that there was only one continuous,
ultimately harmonious universe bound together with definite, even if mysterious, laws.
There is not one mundane world and another heavenly one which absolutely transcends it
In this model he again follows Plato— but more precisely he reflects a Pythagorean
universe.
Figure 8.4: The Cosmological Octave
First Interval
Will of the Absolute
All Worlds
All Suns
Sun
12
All Planets ^^24^
la
sol
fa
Second Interval: Organic Life on Earth
Earth l 48
mi
Moon ( 96 ] re
\ do /
Absolute
161
Gurdjieff taught the primacy of two laws in the cosmos— the Law of Three and the
Law of Seven. These two cosmic laws are harmonized by the octave, exemplified in the
most recognizable device of the Fourth Way, the enneagram. (See Figure 8.5)
The law of Three is based on a concept apparently common to all Indo-European
traditions. It is also demonstrated in the Indian doctrine of the gunas: rajas , tamos , and
sattva (activity, inertia, and being). For Gurdjieff the three principles are the active,
passive, and “neutralizing.” This latter term can be misleading. In fact, according to Fourth
Way teaching, the active and the passive alone tend to cancel each other out unless and until
the “third force” acts as a catalyst that they may create something new. The Absolute is
characterized by these three principles or qualities. The Law of Three becomes a creative
force through the octave.
In the octave again the Pythagorean roots of the Fourth Way system are clear. Gurdjieff
showed how the octave of the musical scale corresponded to the cosmological octave. (See
Figure 8.4)
The developmental progress of an individual is linked to his relative freedom in the
universe. The fewer laws the individual is subject to, the freer the individual is. According
to Mr. G. the physical body is subject to the 48 laws of this planet, the astral body is
subject to the 24 planetary laws, the mental body is subject to the 12 solar laws, while the
Fourth Body is only subject to the six laws of all the suns of the universe. When an
individual is liberated from the lower laws and thus becomes progressively more free,
immortal and potent this is because there are fewer and fewer laws constrain the individual.
The Enneagram
In Meetings with Remarkable Men Gurdjieff ascribed the symbol of the enneagram to a
legendary “Sarmoun Brotherhood.” This appears to be pure mythologizing on Gurdjieff s
part, but that has nothing to do with its usefulness as a symbol. Gurdjieff said of it that it
rendered books useless because it contained all the wisdom necessary to human
development. The ninefold cosmology is common among Indo-European mythologies—
most prominently among the Germanic peoples with the “nine worlds” contained in the
cosmic tree called Yggdrasill.
Figure 8.5: The Enneagram
9
162
The enneagram describes the harmonization of three dissimilar processes: linear
progression, dynamic cycle, and static coalescence. All three are necessary and none is
reducible to one of die others. Figure 8.5 shows all three properties. This is how the Law
of Three and the Octave are harmonized and it is by understanding how this works that
progress in development and mastery over events in one’s life are gained.
The serpent of sequential linear time, Cronos, describes the apparent eternal progress of
events, while the dynamic (and non-linear from the perspective of the sequence 1-9)
recurrent cyclical rhythm of 1-4-2-8-5-7 is demonstrated by the complex “hexad” within the
circle and the static coalescence of 9-3-6 is indicated by the static triangle.
A Fourth Way Theology?
There is no theology in the Fourth Way. “God” or “gods” appear to be virtually
irrelevant to the concerns and methods of the Sly Man. It is here that the close relationship
between the Fourth Way and Buddhistic ideas is quite clear. In all of Gurdjieff s writings
there is only fleeting reference to what he once called “esoteric Christianity.” Mr. G. seems
to have created a myth wherein the teaching of Jesus was passed “from generation to
generation” reaching “the present time in its original formal 04) But if this is true this
“esoteric Christianity” appears to be just another way of saying “non-Christianity” or
Christianity without God or Christ Nowhere in Gurdjieff s original teachings is there
anything which resembles traditional religious concepts or practices found in either early
Christianity or orthodox Judaism. However, most of Gurdjieff s prominent followers
(including Ouspensky and Bennett) tried to make Gurdjieff s teachings appear more
“Christian” than they originally were by using examples or illustrations of his teachings
drawn from Chris tian sources.
The Methodology
Gurdjieff taught according to no discernible set methodology. Neither did he leave
behind any such method. Part of the essence of the disagreement between Gurdjieff and
Ouspensky revolved around the latter’s desire to seek and formulate a universal coherent
methodology of the Fourth Way and Gurdjieff s steadfast insistence on the primacy of the
particular teacher-pupil relationship at a particular and unique time and place.
It seems that Mr. G.’s primary concern in this was that the pupils be guided in a way
which would balance their development and maintain that balance. I f a pupil was overly
intellectual Gurdjieff might recommend physical or emotional Work, and so on. This
understanding of the teacher is, however, dependent upon the essence of the teacher and
can not be quantified or regularized.
There are, however, general tines of development in the Work. Essential to practical
progress is involvement with a school and the help of a teacher— One Who Knows.
The first tine of Work is focused on the self— the individual. One must first practice
self-observation. Gurdjieff told the members of his early Russian group to write an
autobiography without suppressing anything. This was seen as a test for fnrther
progress.(l05) The pupil is given exercises in self-observation— seeing themselves as
objective beings. Everything from bodily habits and movements, to emotional reactions, to
patterns of thought are observed without any attempt at first to control or change anything.
This process usually is enough to learn directly about the multiplicity of ‘Ts” within the
personality. Self-observation may evoke flashes of self-remembering. Self-remembering is
the most important part of the first line of the Work. In self-remembering all three centers—
the thinking, feeling, and moving centers — are active. One is hyper-aware of self and
environment with one’s full attention. Attention is developed to a high level. One of the
common exercises for the development of attention and preparation for self-remembering is
sitting in quiet meditation every morning before daily activity begins.(106)
As the first line of Work is focused on the individual, the second line is centered on
how that individual relates to other individuals. “The hardest thing of a man is to endure the
manifestations of others,” Gurdjieff is reported to have said.(107) The ‘‘manifestations of
others” provide the friction necessary to the further development of essence. Gurdjieff
163
advised pupils to learn to endure the ‘‘manifestations” of people they could not ordinarily
bear without nervousness or discomfort Suppressing the outward expression of negative
emotions provides a friction for the development of internal essence over the personality
acquired through external experience.
The third fine of Work is devoted to the school in selfless service. This is only truly
possible once a high level of essence — or consciousness — has been developed and the
fragmented personality is relatively disarmed.
In the Gurdjieffian system essence is built up through all practical exercises. The
exercises cause friction between a person’s essence and personality. The essence is what is
real or relatively permanent abut an individual, the personality is the product of outside
influences. The Work of developing essence must be pursued in a way balanced among all
the centers. Imbalanced development is, according to Gurdjieff, the usual cause of the
cessation of development of the essence. Most of what a person appears to be is nothing
but an accumulation of personality traits. The development of the individual pursued in the
Work is the development of the essence. Not all essences of individuals are noble, and the
personality is not “demonized.” On the contrary the personality contains the information or
tools the essence will need to develop itself.
“Evil” and the Fourth Way
Although this is not a study in evil per se, the over all subject matter makes it desirable
for us to know what a teacher like Mr. G. thought “evil” was. On one level he noted that
for normal (or subjective) man “evil is everything that is opposed to his desires or interests
or to his conception of good.”(l08) A permanent idea of good and evil is “connected ...
with the idea of man’s development through conscious efforts ...”(109) Everything which
promotes this development — or awakening — is good that which hinders it is evil .
Gurdjieff maintained that good and consciousness were so closely bound to one another
that no conscious act of evil is possible . He once set his pupils the task of committing an
act of “conscious evil” and none could do it
Gurdjieff also addressed the problem of “black magic.” If you return to the definition of
Black Magic given in chapter 1: “Black Magic is for the exercise of independence from the
universe and pursuing self-centered aims,” you will note that the main aims of the Work
accord with that definition. However, Mr. G. did not use the language of Black Magic and
Satanism, or did so on a limited basis, so his definitions are quite different According to
Gurdjieff, black magic “is the tendency to use people for some, even the best of aims,
without their knowledge and understanding , either by producing in them faith and
infatuation or by acting upon them through fear.”(ll0) In terms of the left-hand path
philosophy, this is a perfect description of most institutionalized forms of the right-hand
path!) Black magic is not evil magic it is simply magic which works on others
unconsciously. As regards magic in general, in the same context, Gurdjieff says: “... there
is neither red, green, nor yellow magic. There is mechanics, that is what ‘happens,’ and
there is ‘doing.’ ‘Doing’ is magic and ‘doing’ can be only of one kind. There cannot be
two kinds of ‘doing.’”
Is the Fourth Way Left-Hand Path?
From a structural and methodological standpoint the Fourth Way generally presents a
picture in complete harmony with those of the left-hand path. It is possibly only in the lack
of recognition of the historical and archetypal analogs of the system within Satanic
symbolism that the Fourth Way falls short of the criteria of being a school of the left-hand
path, but this is practically a matter of aesthetics.
Fourth Way teachings, and even its very methodology, are often antinomian. There is a
constant “going against the grain” of nature, of God, of the mechanism of the universe. Its
aim is the attainment of an awakened independently existing intellect and relative
immortality (self-deification), this is individualistic, it comes in initiatic stages (the “seven
men”) and its chief technology is doing — the use of the will to cause the mechanism to
conform to its volition (i.e. “magic”).
164
Gurdjieff is in many ways a more pure practitioner and teacher of the left-hand path
than Aleister Crowley or any other reputed “black magician” of the early occult revival— a
movement he saw himself actually fighting against.
Modern Witchcraft
and the Left-Hand Path
Witchcraft, or “Wicca” is an area of the contemporary occult revival often involved in
discussions of Satanism and by inference the left-hand path. Current adherents of “Wicca”
are usually at great pains to point out that their new religion has nothing to do with the
worship of the Devil. They maintain that such assumptions are carry-overs from the
propaganda of the medieval and early modem churches for whom all heretics or heterodox
worshippers were ipso facto Satamsts: If they worshipped or venerated anything but the
Holy Trinity they were worshipping an image contrary to God and were therefore Satanic .
This included not only unconverted or apostetic pagans or heathens, but also Muslims and
Jews. Many modem witches claim they are reviving or preserving ancient, pre-Christian,
but not necessarily anti-Christian, practices and beliefs. But, of course, from the
standpoint of orthodox religious authority all that is merely another way of defining
Sa tanism in its most virulent form.
Modem “Wiccans” can trace the origin of their neo-pagan religion back to the late
1930s. Most attempts to ascertain the origins of the Wiccan belief system end up focused
on the personality of Gerald Brosseau Gardner (1884-1964). Gardner had little formal
education and spent most of his adult life until 1936, when he retired from the commercial
branch of the British Civil Service, in the Far East In his retirement Gardner returned to
England and slowly began to create the religious system called by the name “Wicca” today.
Although the particulars of the system evolved or changed over the years the essential
elements remained relatively stable.
The most useful written sources for the study of the historical foundations of modem
Wicca are Aiden Kelly’s breakthrough study Crafting the Art qf Magic (1991) together with
Doreen Valiente’s The Rebirth of Witchcraft (1989). Primary sources for “Gardnerianism”
are his ‘‘Book of Shadows” (Ye Bok of ye Art Magical) coupled with his own published
works High Magic*s Aid (1949), Witchcraft Today (1954) and The Meaning of Witchcraft
(1959). For most of its developmental years, however, Wicca remained a system the
essence of which was only transmitted through oral coven teachings and ceremonial
experience.
From its putative beginnings in the late 1930s the “Wiccan Movement” has grown to
shape the spiritual lives of several hundred thousand practitioners, mainly concentrated in
the Anglo-American world. It virtually exploded over the span of half a century with no
central organization or leadership. That, if nothing else, should speak to the power of the
essence of Gardner’s vision.
The ideal Wiccan organization is the “coven” made up of six male/female couples
headed by a high priest or priestess. Originally, since Wicca was supposed to be a survival
of an ancient cult of nature and fertility only heterosexual couples could be admitted.
However, the more recent demographics of the movement would show that a large
percentage of Wiccans in general and their coven organizations now has a specifically
homosexual orientation. The “clergy” or priesthood in a given region or tradition may form
a “council” but for the most part each coven is an independent entity ruled by its priestess
or priest Wiccan initiation consists of three levels or degrees— the most advanced of these
being that of “High Priestess” or “High Priest” Once this level is attained in the coven it is
customary for that person (and perhaps his or her consort) to “hive oft” and create a new
coven. This is the traditional way the Wiccan movement spread according to a sort of
“apostolic succession” from Gardner.
A study of the aims and methods of modem witchcraft or Wicca will show it to be
nothing other than a universalist duotheisitc cult of sexuality. This cult is focused on the
165
establishment of ersatz families in an urbanized largely rootless civilization and on the
practice of methods which are felt to re-connect the individual and the group with some
natural source of power housed in nature and especially in sexuality. Although it may have
many outward similarities with the tantrism discussed in chapter 2, honestly it could not be
characterized as having anything to do with the left-hand path.
The only reference of nay kind of self-deification comes in the form of the belief that
the priest and priestess can, for a time, incarnate the God and Goddess respectively in order
to carry out the “Great Rite”— ritual coitus. They do not embody unique or individual
divinities but The God and The Goddess who are universal. Of course, modem witches do
use techniques of initiation and magic. However, the initiation is actually most often a path
of pre-set training in coven and craft lore and ritual technique rather than a program of the
transformation of the essential being of the initiate. Magic is mostly used for critical needs
(healing, personal worldly advancement, love, etc.)— and then only rarely. Wicca is truly
a new religion with all the expected hallmarks of a religion. Within the cult all are said to be
on an essential level equal. This is the basis for at least one explanation of their practice of
ritual nudity.
There are several antinomian aspects of Wicca: the taking of the name “witch”
(categorically an anti-social label), use of sexuality and nudity (and, in its pure and original
form, flagellation), and the anti-modem stance of looking backward in time (real or
imagined) to find its value system. Most of these antinomian characteristics offend not
against the old religious establishment, but against the new “creed” of positivistic
modernism.
But taken as a whole the Wiccan system is clearly a right-hand path one. Its main
purpose in to reintegrate the individual into an organic model of society (in this case the
symbolic coven) and nature and the cycles of nature, and the integration of the group into a
universal scheme of nature embodied in the God and Goddess. In its most authentic form
in western European culture, wiccecrceft is a revival of the ancient Indo-European cult of
the third function.
During the last half of the 20th century there has been a good deal of friction between
self-professed Satanists and Wiccans. The Wiccans usually see the Satanists as bad for
their image with the public and usually spend a fair amount of time explaining why their
Homed God is not the “Christian” Devil, and how they are not Satanists but only gentle
nature worshippers desiring only to “Harm none While Satanists generally have little
respect for Wiccans whom they see as cashing in on the glamor of the sinister imagery of
Devilry while claiming in essence to be no different than any other religion. The real source
of this friction has nothing to do with “imagery”— but with the reality that Wicca is a right-
hand path system (along with orthodox Christianity, Islam and Judaism) and philosophical
or “religious” Satanism is usually a true left-hand path system. The two, Satanism and
Witchcraft, may appear to be similar, but in fact are worlds apart The friction is simply the
result of people’s inability to distinguish between image and substance.
The occult revival has had two significant phases. In many ways Gardner’s Wicca has
been the bridge between the two phases. The first phase, which has been the subject of this
chapter, was relatively restricted to certain levels of society and was taken relatively more
seriously than the average “New Age” thinker, cult or philosophy is today at the end of the
20th century. This seems largely the result of socioeconomic changes following World War
n. Magical systems and the occult traditions have become consumer goods marketed to the
masses right along with the latest soap or automobile. Of course, we are here again
speaking only in terms of appearances . In reality, no matter how secrets are sold, they can
not be possessed now in any other way than they were at any time in the past— through
hard individual work. Everything else to the contrary is an illusion. The current
practitioners of the left-hand path seem to have grasped this reality, and it usually forms a
part of their philosophies.
166
Notes for Chapter 8
(1) This is a major thesis of James Webb’s The Occult Underground (La Salle, EL: Open Court, 1974).
(2) Bruce F. Campbell, Ancient Wisdom Revived: The History of the Theosophical Movement
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980), pp. 4-6.
(3) Campbell, Ancient Wisdom Revived, pp. 33-34.
(4) Campbell, Ancient Wisdom Revived, pp. 36-37.
(5) Helena P. Blavatsky, Voice of the Silence (Pasadina, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1971),
pp. 12;20.
(6) Blavatsky, Voice of the Silence , I: 80)
(7) Helena P. Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine (Pasadina, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1974) vol
I, p. 193; 411-424; voL H, p. 60.
(8) Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, vol. H pp. 242-243.
(9) Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine , vol. n, pp. 475 ff.
(10) Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, vol. H p. 193.
(11) Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, vol. II, p. 60.
(12) Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, vol. n, p. 421.
(13) Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine , vol. I, p. 198.
(14) Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, vol. H p. 420.
(15) Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, vol. n, p. 421.
(16) Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, vol. n, p. 421.
(17) Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, vol. n, pp. 4 44- 44 6.
(18) Ellic Howe, The Magicians of the Golden Dawn (York Beach. ME: Weiser, 1975), pp. 54-55 et
passim and Ithell ColquhOun, Sword of Wisdom (New York: Putnam, 1975). 118 ff.
19) The bibliography on the Golden Dawn is enormous. The best general history seems to be the one
by Howe, The Magicians of the Golden Dawn .
(20) Read in Crowley’s typescript diary in the Humanities Research Censer at (he University of Texas,
Austin.
(21) Aleister Crowley, The Magical Record of the Beast 666 (London: D uckw orth, 1972), p. 14 et
passim.
(22) No extensive objective history of the O.T.O. exists, see Francis King, The Secret Rituals of the
O.T.O. (New York: Weiser, 1973), pp. 9-35.
(23) Bibliography on the modem occult revival Kabbalah is vohnninons. An interesting study of
Kabbalah for goyim is provided by Stevan Davies, et al. “The Kabbalah of the Kamos: Anglicization of
Jewish Kabbalah,” Studio Mystica 3:3 (Fall, 1980), 34-47.
(24) Aleister Crowley, The Law is for All (Phoenix, AZ: Falcon Press, 1975), p. 106 and Magick
(York Beach, ME: Samuel Weiser, 1973), pp. 171-172.
(25) See Johann Jakob Bachoffen, Myth, Religion and Mother Right trans. FL Manheim, (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1967), includes a translation of Das Mutterrectu originally published in 1848.
(26) Crowley, Law is for All, p. 70.
(27) Aleister Crowley, The Book of the Law (New York: Magkkal Orilde . 1990), p. 22.
(28) Crowley, Magick, pp. 355-383, et passim and Vision and the Voice (Dallas: Sangreal, 1972),
passim.
(29) Aleister Crowley, Eight Lectures on Yoga (Dallas, TX: Sangreal 1972), pp. 12-14.
(30) Crowley, Eight Lectures, p. 20.
(31) Printed in The Equinox EH: 10, p. 144.
(32) Crowley, Magick, p. 238.
(33) Crowley, Magick, p. 146.
(34) Aleister Crowley, Confessions (London: Arkana, 1979). p. 610.
(35) Crowley, Confessions, pp. 394; 403-404; 452-453 et passim .
(36) Crowley, Book of the Law, p. 22.
(37) Crowley, Magick, pp. 296; 375.
(38) Crowley, Magick , p. 172.
167
(39) Crowley, Magick, p. 296.
(40) Crowley, Magick , p. 347.
(41) Crowley, Magick, p. 416.
(42) Crowley, Magick, p. 343.
(43) Crowley, Magick, p_ 296.
(44) Crowley, Magick, p. 172.
(45) Crowley, Book of the Law, 1:22.
(46) Crowley, Magick, p. 131.
(47) Crowley, Magick, p. 60.
(48) Crowley, Magick, p. 294.
(49) Crowley, Magick , p. 177.
(50) Crowley, Magick , p. 299.
(51) Crowley, Magick, p. 295.
(52) Crowley, Magical Record of the Great Beast 666, p. 47.
(53) Crowley, Magick, p. 480.
(54) Quotes on descriptions of grades from Crowley, Magick, pp. 327-333.
(55) Crowley, Magick, p. 295.
(56) Crowley, Magick , pp. 295-296.
(57) Crowley, Magick, pp. 296-297.
(58) Crowley, Magick, pp. 247-249.
(59) Crowley, Law is for All, p. 192.
(60) See John Symonds, The Great Beast: The Life and Magick ofAleister Crowley (Frogmore, UK:
Mayflower, 1972), p. 454.
(61) Crowley, Magick, p. 331.)
(62) Michael A. Aquino, Book of Coming forth by Night: Analysis and Commentary (San Francisco:
Temple of Set), p. 35.
(63) See the bibliography provided by Stephen E. Flowers, Fire and Ice (St. Paul, MN: Llewellyn,
1990), pp. 209-215.
(64) Flowers, Fire and Ice, pp. 1-4.
(65) Flowers, Fire and Ice, p. 8.
(66) See Paschal Beverley Randolph, Sexual Magic trans. Robert North (New York: Magickal Childe,
1988.)
(67) Flowers, Fire and Ice, p. 56.
(68) Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra (trans. Walter Kaufman in The Portable Nietzsche
[New York: Viking, 1954], pp. 200-202.
(69) Published in Blatter fUr angewandte okkulte Lebenskunst (May 1961), pp. 1-9.
(70) Flowers, Fire and Ice, pp. 78-87.
(71) Flowers, Fire and Ice, p. 41)
(72) “Das weltliche Kioster” Blotter fiir angewandte Lebenskunst (Nov. 1953), pp. 1-8.
(73) Kenneth Giant, Images and Oracles of Austin Osman Spare (London: Muller, 1975), p, 7.
(74) Giant, Images and Oracles, p. 7, n. 1.
(75) Austin Osman Spare, Book of Pleasure (Self-Love) (Toronto: 93 Publishing, 1975), passim.
(76) Kathleen R. Speeth, The Gurdjieff Work (New York: Pocket, 1976), pp. 149-165 and J
Webb, The Harmonious Circle (New York: Pu tnam, 1980), passim.
(77) G. I. Gurdjieff, Herald of the Coming Good (New York: Samuel Weiser, 1970), p. 3)
(78) Louis Pauwels, Gurdjieff (New York: Weiser, 1972), pp. 62-65 and Webb, The Harmonious
Circle, p. 45)
(79) Colin Wilson, The Occult (New York: Random House, 1971, pp. 402-403.
(80) The best objective biographies are provided by Webb The Harmonious Circle (1980) and Colin
Wilson, G. /. Gurdjieff: The War Against Sleep (Wellingborough, UK: Aquarian, 1986).
(81) Webb, The Harmonious Circle, 25-26.
(82) Webb, The Harmonious Circle, p. 35.
(83) Webb, The Harmonious Circle, pp. 44-73.
168
(84) Webb, The Harmonious Circle, pp. 187-188-
(85) Webb, The Harmonious Circle , p. 187.
(86) Webb, The Harmonious Circle , pp. 314-315.
(87) See J. G. Bennett’s introduction to P.D. Ouspensky’s Talks with a Devil (London: Aikana, 1988),
p. 11.
(88) Bennett, Introduction to Ouspensky, Talks with a Devil, p. 10.
(89) P. D. Ouspensky, In Search of the Miraculous (New York: Harvest, 1949), p. 59.
(90) See Plato’s “Myth of the Cave” in the Republic (Comford, Republic, pp. 227-235 as well as
specific references to the body as the “prison of the soul,” e.g. in the Phaedo.
(91) Ouspensky, In Search of the Miraculous , p. 47.
(92) Plato Phaedrus 246; 253, see Hamilton and Cairns 1963, pp. 493ff; 499ff., and the Katha
Upanishad 3, see Robert E. Hume, The Thirteen Principal Upanishads (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1931,2nd ed., pp. 351-352.
(93) Onspensky, In Search of the Miraculous , p. 41-42.
(94) Ouspensky, In Search of the Miraculous , pp. 40-41.
(95) Note that this forms an interesting parallel to the attitude of the Marquis de Sade toward Nature.
(96) Ouspensky, In Search of the Miraculous, p. 56.
(97) Ouspensky, In Search of the Miraculous, p. 57.
(98) Ouspensky, In Search of the Miraculous, p. 57.
(99) Ouspensky, In Search of the Miraculous, pp. 57-58.
(100) Ouspensky, In Search of the Miraculous, p. 58.
(101) Ouspensky, In Search of the Miraculous, p- 58.
(102) Ouspensky, In Search of the Miraculous, pp. 315.
(103) Ouspensky, In Search of the Miraculous, pp. 71-73.
(104) Webb, The Harmonious Circle ,p. 520.
(105) Speeth, The Gurdjieff Work, p. 119.
(106) Speeth, The Gurdjieff Work, p. 122.
(107) C.S. Nott, Teachings of Gurdjieff (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1961), p. 100.
(108) Ouspensky In Search of the Miraculous, p. 158
(109) Ouspensky In Search of the Miraculous, p. 158.
(110) Ouspensky In Search of the Miraculous, p. 227.
169
Chapter 9
Anton Szandor LaVey
and the
Church of Satan
By the latter half of the 20th century the first occult revival had run its course. All its
major prophets were dead— Blavatsky, Crowley, Gardner, Spare, Gregorius and
Gurdjieff. But by the culturally tumultuous mid-1960s a new cycle of the occult revival
loomed on the horizon— one that would be played out on the popular level as never before.
Into this new occult theater there stepped a mysterious man with a message for his time.
That man today calls himself Anton Szandor LaVey. The philosophy he has expressed for
almost three decades represents the first major breakthrough of a purely left-hand path form
of thought in the modem western world. Whereas others might have had structurally left-
hand path philosophies — such as G. L Gurdjieff or Gregor A. Gregorius — they did not
overtly combine their philosophies with culturally accepted images of the demonic. LaVey
synthesized external demonic imagery and a coherent focus on the independence of the
individual He brings a mass of new information into the model of the left-hand path from
areas of human thought previously — and subsequently — ignored by occultists. But we
will see how he synthesized all this into a unique — if often pessimistic —
Weltanschauung.
This chapter was written without the cooperation of Anton LaVey. Permissions were
not granted to quote from his works as extensively as I might have liked. In the absence of
his own words explaining his philosophy, the reader will often have to bear with my
interpretations. These may on occasion impugn LaVey’s philosophy with more system than
he ever intended.
171
LaVey’s ideas are well documented. However, facts concerning his life and background
axe — even in his own lifetime — shrouded in mystery. This, it turns out, is a self-created
mystery and one that is really a part of the magical philosophy of the man. In this book I
focus as much as possible on the ideas of the Lords of the Left-Hand Path and eschew as
much as possible the “soap opera” aspects of biography that only tend to distract us from
the central meanings of people’s lives. With LaVey, however, it is important to understand
how his philosophy revolves around the way he has been able to recreate himself out of
self-chosen images. It is in this aspect — hidden though it usually is — that LaVey
exercised his most god-like power.
There were other people who made the Church of Satan the institution it was between
the years 1970 and 1975, such as Diane Hegarty-LaVey, John Ferro, Adrian-Claude
Frazier and Michael Aquino, but the philosophy underlying the Church before, during, and
after that period was the personal philosophy of Anton LaVey which gives the Church its
continuity. As a general practice, I will address the central personal philosophy of LaVey
rather than trying to fit any other elements into the over all Church philosophy.
The Life of Anton LaVev
The saga of Anton Szandor LaVey is not yet at an end. Therefore this section must
necessarily be provisional. The LaVey story is a complex one the crux of which is the
understanding of its mythic components and the tension between mythology and historical
facts.
If it has not become apparent in the contents of this book already, it should be explicitly
mentioned now, that it is often so that the myth , i.e. the idealized and eternal essence, of a
person’s life is more important for us than the biography, i.e. the historical data of external
existence. It is more important because it is more likely to be relevant to our individual
existences and more likely to be of some use to our individual situations than bare factual
biography. Rarely to we get so much opportunity to gain a glimpse into the myth-making
process as we do with Anton LaVey.
The chief published sources for the LaVey legend are Burton Wolfe’s The Devil’s
Avenger (1974) and more recently Blanche Barton’s “authorized” biography The Secret
Life of a Satanist (1990). Both of these works appear to have been approved word-for-
word by LaVey himself and so must be considered as much self-portrayals as anything
else. They provide the canon of myth. Few treatments of LaVey can be called both
objective and informed. A most revealing, if all-too-brief, account is provided by the
journalist Lawrence Wright in an article for the September 1991 issue of Rolling Stone
magazine.
F- «ftnt ial to the nature of the myth of any figure such as LaVey are the influences which
shaped that figure’s thought and action. LaVey himself provided a core list of such
influences on Ms thought on the dedication page of the original printings of his seminal text
The Satanic Bible (1969). It is telling that in more recent printings of the book this page has
been omitted.
On that list appear 19 primary personages with 20 more given a sort of “honorable
mention.” (There is also one anim al., Togare, LaVey’s famous pet lion, and the Nine
Unknown Men.) Almost 70 other names appeared in a similar list in his Satanic Rituals
book. These too have been removed in recent printings of the book. Space does not permit
me discuss each one of these personages in any detail, but the primary list is extremely
important to understanding LaVey’s Satanic philosophy. The 19 primary men are (in the
order he listed them): Bernardino Nogara, Karl Haushofer, Grigory Yefimovitch Rasputin,
Sir Basel Zaharoff, Allesandro Cagliostro, Barnabas Saul, Ragnar Redbeard, William
Mortensen, Hans Brick, Max Reinhardt, Grrin Klapp, Fritz Lang, Friedrich Nietzsche,
’ William Claude Dukinfield, Phineas Taylor Bamum, Hans Poelzig, Reginald Marsh,
Wilhelm Reich and Mark Twain. After the names of each of these LaVey characterizes them
172
with a dedicatory phrase. These are given in quotation marks in the discussions below.
Karl Haushofer (1869-1946), “a teacher without a classroom,” was the founder of the
theory of “geopolitics” and a professor of geography at the University of Munich. He was
sympathetic with National Socialism and exerted influence on its ideology, especially
through one of his students, Rudolf Hess.(l) However, LaVey’s image and admiration of
him comes through the modem mythologizing contained in The Morning of the Magicians
in which the authors have Haushofer involved in various occult goings-on in Tibet and
with the infamous Thule Gesellschaft of Rudolf von Sebottendorf. There is, however, no
evidence for these more “occultnik” connections.
Rasputin (1872-1916), “who knew the magic of a child,” was much admired by LaVey
because he saw the Russian “mad monk” as a lusty manipulator of people (especially
women) and power. All traits respected by LaVey. But as we saw in chapter 6, Rasputin
was not likely to have had anything really “Satanic” about him. LaVey was most certainly
inspired by more lurid accounts of Rasputin(2) — and by the film Rasputin: The Mad
Monk (Hammer, 1965).
Sir Basil Zaharoff (1850-1936), “a gentleman,” was an arms merchant who sold
weaponry and encouraged his customers to use their purchases— all while not only
becoming wealthy but being knighted by the king of England too!
Cagliostro (1743-1791), “a rogue,” was the assumed name of an Italian magician and
alchemist named Guiseppe Balsamo. He billed himself as a “Count” and the “Grand
Kophta” of the Egyptian Lodge, but what was less known was that he had been expelled
from several countries due to his fraudulent dealings. He was popular with the people and a
supporter of revolution, but ended his life in the dungeons of Pope Pius VL
Barnabas Saul was the first “scryer,” or medium, employed by the Elizabethan mage
John Dee (1527-1608). After leaving Dee’s service, Saul disavowed his visions.
Ragnar Redbeard (18427-1926?), “whose might is right,” is a story unto himself.
“Redbeard” was perhaps the pseudonym of Arthur Desmond, an atheist and social
Darwinist street-philosopher from whose book, entitled Might is Right , LaVey lifted whole
sections to create the “Book of Satan” portion of the Satanic Bible (pp. 30-35).
Wdliam Mortensen, “who looked ... and saw,” wrote a photographers’ manual entitled
The Command to Look (1937). The psycho-optical theories contained in it greatly
influenced LaVey’s approach to art and to images and the way they can influence the
human mind. It must be considered a key-stone to LaVeyan Satanism.
Hans Brick, “who knows the law,” wrote a book entitled The Nature of the Beast
(1960) which was a formative influence on the formulation of LaVey’s social philosophy,
especially as contained in the Lex Talonis, or “Eleven Rules of the Earth.”
Max Reinhardt (1873-1943), “a builder of dreams,” was bom Max Goldman in Austria
and became famous as a theatrical director who specialized in staging huge spectacles.
Orrin Klapp (b. 1915), “the walking man,” is a sociologist whose works Heroes ,
Villains and Fools (1962) and The Collective Search for Identity (1969) were greatly
influential on LaVey’s ideas of social movements and change.
Fritz Lang (1890-1976), “who made moving blueprints,” was an Austrian film director
who made such classics as Metropolis (1926) and M (1930).
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900), “a realist,” was a German philosopher and
forerunner to the existentialists. His ideas of the overman (or “superman”) and the “will to
power,” as well as his ideas concerning the existence of natural “masters and “slaves” are
greatly admired by modem philosophical Satanists.
W. C. Fields (1880-1946), “who saved me a journey to Tibet,” was the stage-name of
William C. Dukinfield.
P.T. Bamum (1810-1891), “another great gum,” was the American showman famous
for his exhibits of freaks and establishment of circuses. Bamum’s supposed basic
philosophy: ‘There’s a sucker bom every minute” was taken to heart by LaVey and used as
a mainstay of his worldview.
173
Hans Poelzig (1869-1936), “who knew all the angles,” was a German architect who
specialized in grandiose and imaginative structures. An example is the Grand Theater in
Berlin, also called the Max Reinhardt Theater (1919). He was also the set designer for The
Golem (Deutsche Bioscop, 1914).
Reginald Marsh (1898-1954), "a great artist,” was an illustrator, scene designer and
painter of gritty street scenes, greatly admired by LaVey who is himself a painter of
unusual subjects.
Willielm Reich (1897—1957), “who knew more than cabinet making,” was a German
psychologist who held that there was a material force called “orgone” which worked in
conjunction with the human orgasm. This force could also be collected in “cabinets” called
“orgone accumulators.”
Mark Twain (1835-1910), “a very brave man,” was the pen name of Samuel Langhom
Clemens the great American write:. LaVey much admires Twain for his works Letters from
the Earth (1962) and The Mysterious Stranger (1969) r In an early Church of Satan
document LaVey praises Twain as “one of the greatest of the Devil’s advocates in history”
and as “the most noble embodiment of the Satanist ”(3)
This list of influences provides invaluable insight into the formation of LaVey’s
philosophy and outlook on life. Of the 16 identifiable men fully half of them are artists of
one kind or another. Of these, five dealt with the creation of visual imagery and two, W. C.
Fields and P. T. Bamum. were best known as “trickster” figures. The idealization of image
makers should provide some clue as to the true nature of LaVey’s philosophy and magic.
Beyond these influences there are at least three others which are known but which
remain relatively unacknowledged by LaVey: the horror writer A. Merritt, the magician
Aleister Crowley and the philosophical write- Ayn Rand.
Merritt wrote a novel called Seven Footprints to Satan (1928) which contains a
characterization of Satan — who is ultimately shown to be a carnal being — upon which
LaVey seems to have based his own living portrayal of the Prince of Darkness. In that
novel Satan is a conspiratorial mastermind who draws in followers— subjects them to a
tortuous game of chance in which they must ascend a staircase without stepping on seven
predetermined steps. If they succeed they can have any wish fulfilled, if they fail they will
become the slave of Satan. His zombie-like followers become addicted to a drug, called
Kheft, which he distributed to hold them in thrall. Satan also espouses a philosophy of life
in which he c laim s that only three things are worthwhile: amusement, beauty and “the
game” (which supposedly involves chance). A fourth component, power , is also
mentioned. This provides the rationale for a sort of “meta-game” beyond the apparent
staircase game winch is in fact rigged in Satan’s favor.
Although LaVey views Crowley as a deluded, drug-addicted adventurer, he admires
“the world’s wickedest man” for having lived a full life. In The Devil's Avenger Crowley
is mentioned as an early influence on the adolescent ‘Tony LaVey.”(4) Indeed Crowley
does appear to have been a role-model for LaVey, as perhaps Gerald Gardner was. LaVey
saw Gardner as following in Crowley’s footsteps— after A.C. had “made it safe” to be an
occult leader by taking the heat of negative publicity in the early part of the century.
Crowley had been the villain, but being transformed by historical developments into a
hero— a pioneer of liberated thought — and men like Gardner and his imitators (such as
Alex Sanders) were riding his historical coattails in the more tolerant 1950s and early
1960s— usually as being portrayed as “fools.” The parallels between the development of
Gardner’s publicity campaign (including his “witch museum” and tabloid coverage) and the
one mounted by LaVey in the mid-1960s to early 1970s is remarkable and worthy of
further study. “Occult leaders” such as Crowley appear to have been less magical or
philosophical role-models and more strategic ones for LaVey. In the Church of Satan
serous consideration of Crowley’s magical philosophy would only be given by Michael
Aquino, who wrote a study of it for the Church publication The Cloven Hoof (5)
174
The Russian ex-patriot philosopher Ayn Rand’s books were recommended in the
Church of Satan readmg list in the early 1970s. In subsequent years her influence was not
touted too highly. But her impact was apparently formative on the most succinct
presentation of LaVeyan Satanism: “The Nine Satanic Statements.” In an article written for
the Scroll of Set (June, 1987),(6) G. Smith points out the obvious parallelism between the
number and order of these statements and a speech given by John Galt, the protagonist in
Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged (1957). However, the rhetorical style of the “Statements” is
in turn seems drawn from that of Ragnar Redbeard’s Might is Right .
That most of LaVey’s ideas are not original, and that his philosophy is largely made up
of bits and pieces of the philosophies of others which he recomposed according to his own
tastes and style — unique to himself and to his time — might also be said of some of the
other subjects in this study. We could say the same of every one who ever created a
religion, whether Gautama the Buddha or Gerald Gardner. What makes LaVey somewhat
unusual in this respect is that he often seems to insist on the idea that he invented a way of
thinking, that his Sa tanism is something akin to a product upon which he has a copyright of
some sort* But more remarkable than the idea that LaVey invented his Satanism out of bits
and pieces of obscure philosophies is the fact that he actually invented himself out of the
depths of his own mind.
The Myth of Dr. LaVey
No other figure in the second wave of the “occult revival” has had anecdotes about
certain aspects of his life more widely recorded than Anton LaVey. Is this record mere
history or is it more remarkably the outer form of an act, or “working,” of Lesser (Black)
Magic? If one wanted to write a full and factual biography of Anton LaVey it would
require much research, and commercially published works would probably only provide
the mytho-magical backdrop to the all-too-human, or all-too-demonic, drama lurking below
the surface.
The first si gnifi cant effort at separating fact from myth has been made by Lawrence
Wright. At present a clear separation of myth and fact remains impossible. I will recount
here briefly the reported events of LaVey’s life as given in The Devil's Avenger and The
Secret Life of a Satanist , both of which are authorized biographies, supplemented or
commented upon by data gathered by Wright and other sources. It is not the purpose of this
book to delve into ‘Tabloid” aspects of the lives of the personalities studied. But in some
respects it is important to understand the way a magician might use and invent “history” as
a source of personal power. Anton LaVey appears to be the outstanding modem example of
such sorcery.
Howard Stanton Levey, who was later to be re-invented by himself as Anton Szandor
LaVey, was bom in Chicago on 11 April 1930. His parents’ names were Michael and
Gertrude, although he likes to refer to them as “Joseph” and “Augusta” in his biographies.
Michael Levey became a successful businessman in the liquor trade. Not long after
Howard’s birth the family moved to northern California.
Although predominantly Jewish, his family contained a variety of religious and ethnic
backgrounds. Religion in any formal sense seems not to have been emphasized in
Howard’s early years.
‘Tony” — as he was nicknamed — apparently discovered art and music at an early age.
When he was 14 he found a copy of William Mortensen’s The Command to Look. In this
“how-to” manual of photography (originally published in 1937) Tony saw a key to magic
and to the manipulation of others. He would use these principles later in his own paintings.
He also must have begun to learn a great deal about music and the playing of various
instruments.
175
In the “authorized” biographies it is reported that Tony went with one of his uncles to
Germany in 1945 just after the war ended.(7) He has often claimed to have been, at 15, the
youngest musician to have played for the San Francisco Ballet Orchestra— as second
oboist. This seems unlikely as, according to the research of Lawrence Wright, there was no
orchestra by that name, nor a musician by his name in any San Francisco orchestra.(8) The
next year, at 16 years of age, Tony dropped out of high school.
One of the most important factors in the LaVey legend is his association with the circus
as a Hon tamer. It is widely claimed that he worked for the Clyde Beatty Circus beginning
in the spring of 1947.(9) Again no record exists of anyone by his name ever working for
the Beatty Circus.(lO) From there he claims to have begun a career playing a variety of
keyboard instruments in various places ranging from carnivals to night clubs and strip
joints.
It was at one of the latter type of establishments in Los Angeles that Tony claims to
have met, and had an affair with, Marilyn Monroe in 1948.(11) Serious biographers of
Monroe have expressed extreme doubts about her employment in strip shows and her
association with LaVey.(12)
From Los Angeles Tony moved back to northern California. In 1949 he is supposed to
have enrolled in City College of San Francisco for courses in criminology, and from this to
have developed a second career as a poHce photographer. It was as a photographer of
scenes of senseless brutality and violence that LaVey was supposed to have confirmed his
Him assessment of human nature.(13) Again, however, public records show no trace of
him under any nam e at City College or on the payroll of the poHce department
In 1950 he met Carole Lansing and in 1951 they were married in Reno, Nevada. The
record of this marriage is the first appearance of the name “La Vey ”(14) Their daughter,
Karla, was bom in 1952.
It was apparently around this time that LaVey began to become more deeply interested
in magic and occult culture. He is said to have made contact with the “Church of Thelema”
headed by Francis Israel Regardie, a one-time personal secretary to Aleister Crowley.
LaVey’s contacts with groups, however, remained informal. He appears to have pursued
his interests in magic — as he had all his personal interests — privately and
unconventionally. Throughout the 1950s, it seems he mainly supported himself and his
family through his many jobs playing piano and organ in various San Francisco area night
clubs and theaters. Throughout this time he was also said to have acted as a “psychic”
investigator and professional hypnotist
Beginning in the mid-1950s LaVey began Hving in a house then owned by his father
Michael Levey on California Street in San Francisco. Eventually this was to become the
infam ous Black House.
In 1960 LaVey became interested in a 17 year old movie theater usherette named Diane
Hegarty. He eventually had her move into his house and son thereafter he began giving
Friday night classes in various occult subjects. During the early 1960s regular visitors to
LaVey’s house coalesced into what became known as the “Magic Circle.” This “circle”
included the avant garde film maker Kenneth Anger, anthropologist Michael Hamer, the
locally famous “mad countess” Carin de Plessin (who was indeed a member of the Danish
peerage, as well as writers, doctors, lawyers, prominent night club people and some
members of the poHce force.
In 1962 LaVey divorced Carole, but never officially married Diane. On 19 November
1963 Diane bore Anton a daughter whom he named Zeena Galatea LaVey.
Starting as early as the mid-1960s Anton had been drawing attention to himself locally
by keeping big cats as pets and often walking them in public on a leash. The first of these,
Zoltan, was a black leopard. Zoltan was killed by a car near the Black House in 1964.
Soon thereafter LaVey acquired Togare, a 10 week-old Nubian Hon.
176
In that same year a local American Humane Association television production for
children, called The Wonderful World of Brother Buzz , gave a glimpse inside the house
and its occupants Anton, Diane, Karla, Zeena— and Togare. The film shows the interior of
LaVey’s private world much the same as it would appear four years later, after the
founding of the Church of Satan, in a 1968 documentary, Sattmis: The Devil’s Mass. This
is important for the understanding of the genesis of the Church of Satan.
The Early Church of Satan
1966-1970
‘To 1966— The Year One!”
in Rosemary’s Baby (1968)
A member of LaVey’s Magic Circle, who had experience in publicity and financial
matters surrounding churches and non-profit org anizat ion.^ Edward M. Webber, suggested
to Anton that he found a church based on his teachings.(15) This was done in a rather
informal ceremony on 30 April 1966 — Walpurgisnacht — a traditional German witches’
festival made famous in literature by Goethe’s Faust . The year 1966 was declared the year I
Anno Satanis and Anton LaVey declared himself the High Priest of Satan and Exarch of
Hell.
The more conservative and socially influential people in the “Magic Circle” seemed to
have supported this development and wanted the Church and the Black Pope to move on to
more serious and substantial ground. But LaVey appears to have sabotaged this direction of
development by seeking the most lurid kind of publicity. He put on a “Topless Witches
Review” in a theater in San Francisco. One of bus witches was Susan Atkins, then using
the stage name Sharon King. She would later go on to become one of the “Family”
gathered around Charles Manson.
The Black Pope, it appears, had his own vision of what he was doing. Institutions of
any kind had always been an anathema to him. So, it seems, the Church of Satan, as an
institution, was bom in a state predestined for a certain kind of damnation.
In the years between 1966 and 1970 the Church existed as a more or less local San
Francisco phenomenon. The wider publicity it gained was chiefly through the personality
and activities of Anton LaVey himself. He continued with topless witches shows and with
his public lectures at the Black House. The lectures were usually punctuated by a theatrical,
or psychodramatic, ritual demonstration. On 1 February 1967 LaVey presided over a
wedding ceremony between writer John Raymond and socialite Judith Case. On 8
December the High Priest of Satan officiated at the funeral of Navy Seaman Edward D.
Olsen— complete with honor guard. These public acts outraged and fascinated elements of
the mass media and their audience.
The High Priest was asked to be a “technical advisor” for Roman Polanski’s film
version of Ira Levin’s novel Rosemary’s Baby in 1967 as welL This was the be ginnin g of
several cinematic advisory roles LaVey was to have, including The Devil’s Rain (1975),
and Dr, Dracula (1976). This latter film contains some obviously LaVey an ideas on the
possibilities of immortality.
During the years of 1966 and 1967 LaVey carried on an ambiguous personal
relationship with the film actress Jayne Mansfield. Accounts of this relationship vary from
those provided by LaVey — which show the actress as a sexually masochistic worshipper
of the masterful High Priest —(16) to that provided by Mansfield’s biographer May Mann
and others— which show her being pursued by an aggressive LaVey and somewhat
repelled and perhaps a bit frightened of him.(17) In any event, Anton and Jayne’s lawyer
and confidant, Sam Brody, did not like one another. For a variety of causes, so the legend
goes, the Black Pope put a curse on Brody. On 29 June 1967 Jayne Mansfield and Sam
Brody were killed in a car wreck in Louisiana. After her death LaVey spoke more
177
provocatively about her involvement with the Church. (Only later, after 1975, did LaVey
begin to tell how his curse had worked its magic— in an unintentionally tragic way on the
actress, when he was only trying to get the lawyer.)
The summer of 1968 saw the release of Polanski’s Rosemary* s Baby. LaVey, whose
eyes at least had a bit part in the film playing the Devil who impregnates Rosemary, was
also employed in publicity for the film’s premier at the Marina Theater in San Francisco. At
that premier was a young Second Lieutenant shortly bound for active duty in Vietnam
named Michael A. Aquino. Aquino would later exert enormous influence within the Church
and subsequently found the Temple of Set in 1975.
The Greater Church of Satan
1970-1975
The Satanic years V to X were perhaps the high point of the life of the Church of Satan.
This period was ushered in with the publication and release of The Satanic Bible in January
of 1970 as an Avon paperback. Now the sensationalistic publicity was backed up with a
succinct expression of LaVey 7 s Satanic philosophy available in every neighborhood
bookstore. The Church could no longer be the local San Francisco phenomenon it had
been. In 1968 Church membership had been only 50-60.(C£?S, p. 17) Despite the
enormous surge in worldwide publicity generated by the release of the Satanic Bible actual
membership in 1975 had only grown to about 250.
Over the five-year period the Church gained members from all over the world. Local
Satanists wished to organize and hold rituals in emulation of events at LaVey’s Black
House. Now the Church needed an administration. Much of that administration was
handled by Diane, who often responded to correspondence under the name “Lana Green.”
During this period another important administrator became that young army officer who
had first seen LaVey at the premier of Rosemary’s Baby , Michael Aquino. He was named a
Priest of Satan and a member of its ruling body, “The Council of Nine” (Or alternatively
“Council of the Trapezoid”) in 1970 upon his return from Vietnam. From late 1971 to
midsummer 1975, he was the editor of die Cloven Hoof \ the chief in-house publication of
the Church.
Also in 1971, LaVey 7 s second book, The Compleat Witch: or What to do when Virtue
Fails , appeared. This book might at first glance seem to be a rather extremist book for
women on “how to get men.” It contains all sorts of advice many find outrageous— such
as telling women to save portions of their sanitary napkins or tampons in a pouch and to
use the subtle odor from it as a perfume-talisman to attract the erotic interest of men.(I8)
But as a whole it is not only ‘‘the first ‘self-help’ book” of the me-generation 1970s, but
also a manual of the principles of what LaVey called “Lesser Magic.” Most of LaVey’s
magic has been of this type— sometimes on a grand scale (such as the publication of the
Satanic Bible or the generation of media attention to cause shifts in public opinions or
attitudes) and sometimes on a small scale (such as when he would charm or frighten
individuals in his immediate environment).
Late in 1972 LaVey’s third book — and last one for more than two decades — The
Satanic Rituals appeared in the bookstores. This is a collection of rituals some of which are
originally by LaVey. But many of the texts were written by others. “The Black Mass” was
by Wayne West, then a Priest in the Church, “The Call to Cthulhu” and “The Ceremony of
the Nine Angles” were both by Michael Aquino, as was the “Adult Baptism” ritual.(19)
Now the Church’s literary base was in place. All of which continued to generate attention
and publicity for the High Priest
Outside of San Francisco the Church structure continued to grow. Local groups of the
Church, called “Grottos,” were established in various places. By 1975 there were, or had
been, a total of around a dozen Grottos established in the US and abroad. These sometimes
caused problems for the “Central Grotto” in San Francisco. There appears to have been an
178
increasing underlying friction between the centralized personality cult surrounding Anton
LaVey in San Francisco and the more widespread transpersonal Church throughout the
country during this period.
Several regional gatherings, called “Conclaves,” were held, mainly in the northeast,
between the years 1971 to 1974. The last one was held in Windsor, Ontario in August of
1974. No national or international Conclave was ever organized for the Church of Satan,
and Anton LaVey never attended any of these regional Conclaves.(20)
During this middle, or greater, era of the Church of Satan an initiatory structure was
worked out— which seems to have come only as an afterthought to the foundation of the
Church. These are discussed in some detail below. LaVey”s original attitude toward
initiation, grades, and so on, appears to have been subjective at first If he felt a person was
worthy of being named — or “elevated” as he liked to call it — to the Priesthood or
Magistry, he simply “elevated” them on his personal authority as High Priest.
Organizationally this remained possible because the “Church of Satan” was never actually
incorporated as a Church , but rather remained more or less an assumed name for Anton
LaVey’s business purposes.
This tendency re-emerged in LaVey in 1975 when he, after previously authorizing and
endorsing the idea that the Priesthood of Church as to be Recognized on merit alone,(21)
reverted to the idea that it could be “bought” through donations to the “Church” (i.e. to
LaVey himself) or merely on his personal judgment (22) The resultant fallout from existing
members of the Clergy led to what might be called a schism in the Church in the summer of
1975. A large percentage of the non-San Francisco membership and Clergy resigned from
the Church at that time. It was at this time that Michael Aquino is said to have assumed the
“Infernal Mandate” — a term not used by LaVey himself — and with it formed the Temple
of Set. (See Chapter 10) This event brought an end to the wider experiment known as die
Church of Satan — as it, and its leader, returned to the reclusive existence deep within the
recesses of the Black House.
The Withdrawal of Dr. LaVey
The Church of Satan after 1975
LaVey’s public pronouncements had placed Church membership over 25,000— and
eventually claims would be made into the millions. In fact active Church membership never
exceeded a couple of hundred. That is not to say LaVey has not influenced millions of
people— sales of his books exceed would indicate such numbers. The schismatic events of
1975 caused the Church of Satan, such as it remained, to return to being mainly a
personality cult gathered around Anton.
Publicity surrounding the Church of Satan and its founder dwindled and became more
and more infrequent throughout the late 1970s and early 1980s. The Cloven Hoof
continued to be published— and its contents revealed a High Priest less interested in the
techniques of magic and more interested in social commentary and the maintenance of a
reclusive and unique life-style. But because of this refocusing Ins writings from this period
are even more unique than anything earlier. Post-1975 accounts of the Church and LaVey
emphasized the idea that the organization had “gone underground” or entered a “second
phase,” but continued to be strong.(23) Little more was heard of LaVey on the public scene
until the mid-1980s.
Perhaps it is part of the legacy of a large segment of America’s culture moving to
ultraconservative — often bordering on the medieval — positions on issues of “religion” or
“social values,” but by the middle of the 1980s there was a renewed interest in Satanism.
This time, however, it was not in the open and inquisitive spirit of the late 1960s and early
1970s, but rather in the narrow and bigoted one of the 1980s. These new medievalists
sensed that something had gone deeply wrong with American society, and who else could
be at fault but S-A-T-A-N!
179
A combination of this renewed negative interest and the internal struggles going on
within the Black House itself led to a reemergence of Dr. LaVey. The first portrait of the
resurrected High Priest came in a story about him in the February 23,1986 edition of The
Washington Post Magazine. (24) In die intervening years he and Diane had gone their
separate ways (in 1984) and LaVey had acquired a new “girl Friday"'— Blanche Barton. In
partnership with her the Church was revitalized in the late 1980s and early 1990s. This
period of revitalization continues to the present
There was also at this time a resurgence in LaVey’s public exposure— as shown in the
number of resource materials published between 1988 and 1992. But the life story of
Anton Szandor LaVey by this time had no real events to recount. He had completed his
magical transformation from Howard Stanton Levey and lurked within the recesses of the
Black House truly transformed into something akin to one of the Black Brothers as
described by Aleister Crowley. (See chapter 8.) The story of Howard S. Levey may be a
fascinating tale of human travails-— but in fact Anton LaVey has made that tale irrelevant as
he has re-invented himself and isolated that self from all that would disturb it. Within
LaVey’s own magical system and universe, it is not important what he has done, but only
what he IS. There will be yet a final chapter to the “LaVey Legend”— but as for now it
stands in the Is-To-Be.
Sources for the Study of Anton LaVey
Primary Sources
To understand the Black Pope, one must start with what he himself has either written or
adapted. His major published works are The Satanic Bible (1969), The Complete Witch
(1971), reissued in 1989 as The Satanic Witch , The Satanic Rituals (1972) and numerous
articles printed in The Coven Hoof, the internal organ of the Church of Satan between 1969
and 1988 when it ceased publication. In 1992 LaVey’s long unpublished manuscript. The
DeviTs Notebook was made available by Feral House. Some of the essays in this book had
been released over the years in Cloven Hoof articles. The versions printed in the 1992 book
are, however, sometimes abridged or reedited versions. Most of this material presents a
serious and erudite man of broad learning and unique tastes. Another document that has to
be considered a primary source is an article introduced by John Fritscher consisting almost
entirely of LaVey’s own words as he comments on a wide variety of topic$.(25)
Secondary Sources
Few, if any, institutions of the second occult revival have had as much written about
them as the Church of Satan.(26) It has been covered widely in all communications media.
LaVey was a frequent guest of night-time talk show hosts from Joe Pyne to Steve Allen,
stories about the Church appeared in every major news magazine, perhaps hundreds of
articles have been written about LaVey and his Church.
These secondary sources must be divided into two categories. The fust category
consists of those works over which LaVey seems to have exerted direct and final control. A
highly sympathetic account of the Church was given by Arthur Lyons in a book entitled
The Second Coming: Satanism in America (1970). Lyons was at the time a 1° member of
the Church and has remained friendly with LaVey through the years. His later book, Satan
Wants You (1988) essentially repeats only information that seems to be personally
approved by Dr. LaVey himself.
Even more extreme is the case of the first “biography” of the Black Pope by Burton
Wolfe (also aivoff-again, on-again “member” of the Church) entitled The DeviTs Avenger
(1974). Michael A Aquino reports that he read a draft of the proposed book by Wolfe early
in 1974 which was totally different from the one finally published in November of that
year. Aquino is convinced The DeviTs Avenger is really more an autobiography than
anything else. (COS, 355) Finally in this category are two more recent books by Blanche
180
Barton: The Secret Life of a Satanist and The Church of Satan (both 1990). All of these are
valuable as portrayals of LaVey and his organization as he would have others view him and
it
Another category of secondary sources is made up of those uncontrolled by LaVey.
One group of these consists of academic or scholarly studies. However, even in these we
find that the authors have been very friendly with LaVey on a personal level. Randall H.
Alfred studies the Church from 1968 to 1969— in the course of his study he also became a
member of the Church and its ruling council. (27) His resulting article was not published
until 1976 in a volume entitled The New Religious Consciousness.(28) Another scholar,
Edward J, Moody, joined the Church in San Francisco and participated in ritual activities
and eventually became a Satanic Priest himself. His active involvement lasted from October
1967 to August of 1969. Later he published two articles, “Urban Witches” (1971) and
“Magical Therapy: An Anthropological Investigation of Contemporary Satanism” (1974).
Another scholar, and long-time friend of Dr. LaVey, Marcello Truzzi, wrote about the
Church in 1972 in an article for the Sociological Quarterly .(29) These studies are valuable
as alternate perspectives on LaVey and his philosophy, but in all cases the authors are still
under the spell of LaVey’s considerable personal charisma.
The other category of secondary material is journalistic in nature. Such journalistic
accounts of LaVey and the Church of Satan abound.(30) Most of these are superficial and
repetitive of often-heard anecdotes about the Black Pope’s exploits. However, there have
been a few reports which have provided some important information. The most significant
of these is the 1991 article by Lawrence Wright in Rolling Stone already mentioned. Others
of some importance include Walt Harrington’s essay for The Washington Post Magazine in
1986, Grant Harden’s widely syndicated newspaper piece in October 1978 and Dick
Russell’s article in Argosy in 1975.
Two interesting film documentaries exist. One is the comical Wonderful World of
Brother Buzz episode (1964), the other is the Ray Laurent documentary film Satanis: The
Devil’s Mass (1970). This latter film is the source continually used for file footage in
television reports relating to Satanism. It provides for a great deal of insight on the public
perception of LaVey in the local San Francisco area during the early years of the Church.
The film consists of ritual sequences and interviews with LaVey and other members of the
Church as well as with LaVey’s neighbors— who provide some of the most interesting and
amusing perspectives. Those who look closely will see young Isaac Bonewits — a later
would-be druid — having his “member” blessed by the High Priest
Beyond doubt the most important single document chronicling the Church, especially
from about 1969 to 1975, is the mammoth and privately printed volume entitled The
Church of Satan by Michael Aquino (1983; 1989; 1992). As Aquino was an important
Church official and confidant of LaVey’s during the years covered intensively, the work
gives a special insider’s view. At the same time because of the subsequent split with
LaVey, it is perhaps more objective than even those studies published through more
scholarly outlets by those who remained under LaVey’s charming spelL Aquino includes
almost 400 pages of text and well over that number of pages of primary documentary
evidence in the form of appendices. This book is not available commercially.
The Organization of the Church of Satan
In the first 30 years of its existence the Church of Satan has operated under several
different organizational plans. However, one set of principles outlined fairly early in the
history of the Church seems to have guided it more than anything else: “The position held
by Anton LaVey as High Priest is monarchial in nature, papal in degree, and absolute in
power.” (31) This is essentially because LaVey incorporated the Church as a sole
proprietorship — as a “business” of which he is die boss . (Note that this is how LaVey
181
believes all churches and religious organizations should be require to do business. This is
the second point of his five point Pentagonal Program.)
The origins of the Church of Satan as an organization are controversial. According to
LaVey the idea for the Church came to him in a “blinding flash” of initiatory
awakening. (32) He then evolved the Magic Circle, also secretly known as the Order of the
Trapezoid, according to LaVey, into the governing body of the Church. This became
known as the Council of Nine (or alternatively the Order of the Trapezoid).(33) Other
sources indicate a more mundane inspiration. One of LaVey’s long-time neighbors appears
in the film Satanis saying: “According to Mr. Webber, a publicity man whom I met, he and
Mr. LaVey came upon the idea that, with LaVey owning a lion, a Satanist church would be
a wonderful offshoot since he did evidently believe in the Devil ” A later interview with that
“publicity man” basically confirmed this view (Scroll 17:3, pp. 7-8.)
As with all organizations in a historical perspective the “facts” only tell a part of the
story. Though they may be relevant to complete understanding, they only convey external
appearances which, as often as not, conceal more enigmatic realities. If the historical facts
were known, the cynic might be tempted to dismiss Moses as a political opportunist, Jesus
as a manipulative, power-mad sorcerer, and Mohammed as a blood-thirsty conqueror. In
the cynical scope of things the supposed ‘Tactual sins” of Anton LaVey don’t seem so bad
after all.
The chief officers of the early Church were that of High Priest held in perpetuity by
Anton LaVey and that of High Priestess held exclusively by Diane LaVey. The Church was
essentially a “papa and mama shop.” Supposedly at various times the Council of Nine
met— but its role was always strictly advisory in its capacity.(Alfred, p. 184) No official
provision has ever existed for the removal of LaVey from his position for reasons made
clear before.
Most interesting for the purposes of this book is the degree system of the Church of
Satan. Its structure has remained more or less intact from die early days of the Church,
although the criteria for “elevation” through the degrees have undergone some changes.
This system will later become the basis for the Temple of Set degree system, so it is of
essential importance in understanding the process of initiation for these two influential
organizations on the left-hand path.
Pre-1975 Degree System of the Church
For the Church of Satan there are definitely two eras or epoches with regard to the
degree system, pre-1975 and post-1975. The earlier system was geared for the
development and maintenance of a “sacred” organization separate from the mundane world,
while the later system has been geared for a “secular” form of Satanism.
The original degree scheme consisted of five levels— at least externally. These were
signified with Roman numerals I - V with an appended degree symbol (°). They were also
given dramatic titles, such as Warlock and Enchantress. Three important articles from the
pre-1975 Cloven Hoof are the basis of the following discussion— “An Explanation of the
Various Degrees of the Church of Satan” (1970), “What is a Satanic Master?” (1971), and
“Official Degrees of the Church of Satan” (1972). The latter article was actually written by
Michael A Aquino.
1° Apprentice, or “Active Member,” is one who is formally committed to the philosophy
of Satanism, Members remain at this level perpetually unless they resign or are expelled by
the Council of Nine.
n° Warlock (male) or Witch (female) is one who has passed a formal examination on
Satanic philosophy and magic. These could then become leaders of local Grottos in
preparation for the Priesthood.
m° Priest (male) or Priestess (female) is one who has established and maintained an
authorized Grotto while upholding the dignified image of the Church. This “image” would
182
include things from the kind of car the person drives, to their living quarters, to economic
stability, to personal appearance. Members of the clergy would represent the Church m the
media and so they had to have a high level of communications skills. In addition to these
external requirements, the prospective Priest or Priestess had to take a written examination
relevant to the degree. The imperative here was that the Satanic Priesthood would be made
up of the kind of people who would be successful in all phases of life and not just those
who were running into the occultic world to gain the recognition they were not able to gain
it in the real world. LaVey was very serious about the necessity of high standards for the
Priesthood of Satan; “[T]he Priest of Satan must be bener read, more self-aware, more
achieved for his years, more articulate, more genuinely dedicated to his
chosen faith than are the clergy of any other religion known to man ”(34)
IV 0 Magister — or Master — is one who has built up his Grotto to the level where
additional members of the Priesthood are necessary in the area. Magisters act in a way
similar to that of Bishops, Archbishops, Cardinals in the Roman Catholic Church. This
administrative attitude toward the Magistry was short lived— a peculiarity of the optimistic
atmosphere of pre-1975 Satanism in America.
Beyond this administrative function, to be appointed as a Master by the High Priest, the
Priest or Priestess would be evaluated according to criteria that were later kept secret.
However, in the 1971 Cloven Hoof article on the subject the High Priest defined a Satanic
Master as someone who has created some thin g by conscious application of certain
principles which has significantly influenced or modified the lives of great numbers of the
world’s population .{CH 3:9 [1971], p. 1.)
This definition in many ways bleeds over into the definition given in an earlier article of
the Fifth Degree.
V° Magus is the degree conferred on members of the Magistry “who have discovered
and brought forth a new magical principle and utilized it in a namg that profoundly affects
the activities of the world.” (CH 2:11 [1970], p. 8.) Mysteriously. LaVey, writing as John
M. Kincaid, alludes to “four additional degrees” beyond that of Magus. These are never
discussed again, although the Temple of Set was to develop the VT Ipsissimus. These and
whatever other criteria pertinent to the degrees of Magus and Magister were also made
secret at a later date. LaVey himself is the only person ever recognized as a Magus in the
Church of Satan. By the way, the official form of address for a Magus is “Doctor ” and it
is for this reason that LaVey is sometimes so addressed by his followers, not because he
claims to have an actual academic Ph.D from an accredited univexsiry.
In the early days it is clear that LaVey considered himself a unique historical
“embodiment of Satan,” who was the Satanic Magus of the present “Age of Fire” which
began in 1966/1. His Task was the “bringing of Satanism ineo the world as an organized,
legitimate, above ground persuasion— and with it restoring the dignity of man’s own
godhead.” (p. 8)
Post-1975 Degree System at the Church
Following the watershed year of 1975 the degree syscm changed in some essential
ways, yet the basic validity of the five degrees of Satanism is still upheld.(35) According to
LaVey at this point the degree system as it had been was an experiment in seeing how far
Satanists could be organized. But as he sees it now, true Satanists remain non-joiners and
are virtually impossible to organize.
A concrete example of the results of this realization comes in the for of the official color
designation of the ceremonial medallions worn by members of the Church. According to a
Cloven Hoof article published early in 1976 there was originally no official policy on the
colors of the medallions worn by members of the Church at various levels of initiation. (36)
Then, with increased standardization in later years. Official policy required that 1° members
word a black Sigil of Baphomet against a red background, IT members wore black ones
against a white background, HI 0 members of the Priesthood had white Baphomets on black
183
backgrounds, while IV 0 members of the Magistry originally wore specially designed silver
pentagrams — later this was changed to a Baphomet on a blue background. The one and
only V° — LaVey himself—was to wear a free-standing silver pentagram. In the case of
LaVey, as the High Priest of Satan, this was struck through with a lightning bolt But the
1976 article abandons all of that formality in favor of the reported individual freedom of the
early days. Colors such as “peacock green” and “opalescent pink” became available for a
time — in celebration of unconventional Satanic aesthetics.
The post-X degree system has become keyed to another, alternative, scheme of
development which is said to describe not only the historical evolution of the Church of
Satan, but personal initiation as well. This is the schemata of the five (or six) phases of
Satanism(37)
First Phase Satanism is characterized by the key concept of Emergence. In the history
of the Church of Satan this is when the Satanic Age was crystallized into reality and made
manifest in society. LaVey sees this as the equivalent of the 1° Apprentice level in the
original initiatory scheme when applied to individuals. At this stage an outward show of
Satanism with public rituals, and so on, may be important to help the individual break
down social or psychological barriers to development
Second Phase Satanism is marked with that key idea of Development. Historically this
is the period of public expansion by the Church. It is also seen as a stage of distillation in
which the Satanic “ideal” is separated from that which does not meet these criteria.
Third Phase Satan is is distinguished by the key concept of Qualification. This involves
the development of respectability and an image of prestige to the outside world.
Fourth Phase Satanism is marked with the key idea of Control “Ideal” elements
isolated in Phase Two are stratified and further isolated into a separate and definite social
structure. In personal initiation this is the stage where mastery begins. There is an isolation
from the general environment in which true individuality can manifest itself.
Fifth Phase Satanism is indicated by the key word of Application. Techniques
developed through the first four phases are employed as the “Myths of the Twentieth
Century” are understood and exploited. At this end of the initiatory spectrum LaVey says
“we still have Magisters and Magistras who divorce themselves from the m ains tream as
much as possible and arrange their lives to earn money at things that entail a minimal
amount of contact with or input from the herd— artists, directors, writers, performers,
entrepreneurs of various kinds...”(38)
For LaVey these Phases have, so far, ended in a posited Phase Six which involves “the
development, promotion and manufacture of artificial human companions.” this will be
discussed at further length elsewhere in this chapter, bnt at this point it is important to note
the initiatory logic of Phase Six. As an essential part of left-hand path initiatory technique
involves the separation of the subject from his or her environment in order that a true
individual essence can be distilled, LaVey’s decidedly sociological and materialistic brand
of the left-hand path ideology virtually demands a progressive isolation from the influences
of other people. As Sartre said, “Hell is other people.” In an inversion of this, LaVey
maintains that “other people” must be artificially replaced in accordance with the will of the
magician in order that an “Infernal Paradise” can be created.
The conclusion on the Church of Satan as an organization must be that it only existed as
such for a few years— from 1966 to 1975.
Major Doctrines of the Church of Satan
There have been three major doctrinal documents issued by LaVey since the inception
of the Church of Satan in 1966/L Typically they come in the form of enumerated aphorisms
some of which can be understood on various levels. These official doctrines should be
allowed to shape our primary understanding of LaVey’s teachings and hence of his Church
of Satan.
184
The Nine Satanic Statements
(Circa 1966: First published in the Satanic Bible 1969)
These statements are the mainstays of the philosophy of the Church of Satan, and are
often reprinted in journalistic discussions of LaVey and the organization.
The first six of the Statements are couched as contradictory formulas— Satan
represents indulgence, vital existence, and undefiled wisdom instead of abstinence,
spiritual pipe dreams and hypocritical self-deceit There is a “this’ 1 instead of“ that” — so
that not only is a positive affirmation given, but also an accompanying negative assertion.
This is partially indicative of LaVey’s particular form of dualism which will be explored
below.
The likely origin of the formulaic presentation of the Nine Satanic Statements in the
work of Ayn Rand has already bean noted above.
The First Statement, inspired by the Redbeard text Might is Right , extols indulgence as
the essence of LaVey an Satanic philosophy. In the Satanic Bible (ch. VIII) LaVey is careful
to distinguish between indulgence and compulsion, that is, between consciously and
willfully practicing an act which gives one pleasure and fulfills a natural desire and
unconsciously and uncontrollably committing an act which one “can’t help but do."
indulgence is the fulfillment of a desire with its origins in one’s essential human nature.
Compulsion is outside one’s conscious control. LaVey sees as natural indulgence in all the
so-called seven deadly sins of Christianity: greed, pride, envy, anger, gluttony, lust and
sloth. Each of which he views as a possible catalyst for positive and natural human
activities or attitudes— such as ambition, self-respect, self-preservation, material or
physical well-being and pleasure of all kinds. (See the Satanic Bible ch. HI.) The fact that
most people today, and the whole “western industrialized economy” is really driven by the
desires of the masses to indulge in all of the seven deadly sins is a powerful argument for
the presence of a Satanic Age.
Abstinence is seen as the unhealthy, coerced cessation of natural human aspirations, or
the belief that these are somehow evil or bad and that a moral person should abstain from
them.
The crucial factor in distinguishing between or among indulgence, compulsion and
abstinence is the actual will or nature of the individual. Otoe should not have to work at
what one wishes to indulge in— it should come naturally and be pleasuiable.(39)
After 1975 the Temple of Set philosophy re-interpreted LaVey’s use of the word
“indulgence" in terms of an Aeonic Word, analogous to Crowley’s Thelema . This dignity
of the word was never formally claimed by LaVey, though repeatedly he has summed up
his Satanic philosophy in that word.
The Second Statement relates to LaVey’s essentially materialistic, epicurean philosophy
of life. “Vital existence” — the power of living flesh — is not only extdled over things
“spiritual,” but spirituality itself is relegated to the category of a “pipe dream”— an illusion.
The spirit and god are not so much seen as positive enemies in LaVeyan philosophy as they
are illusions or unrealities which are used by the mass mind to console and protect itself—
through self-deceit
Thz Third Statement targets this self-deceit which is one of the Nine Satanic Sins. This
opens the door to hypocrisy which is one of the chief manifestations of the “herd mentality”
against which LaVeyan Satanism seeks to fight. This is LaVey’s version of the Delphic
exhortation to “Know Thyself.” Understanding of this and of the way the world is really
pnt together represents the “undefiled wisdom.”(cf. LaVey’s translation of the 19th
Enochian Key.)
The Fourth Statement — “Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it, instead of
love wasted on ingrates!” relates to chapter V of the “Book of Lucifer'’ in the Satanic Bible
(“Love and Hate”). In that chapter LaVey argues that oue can not love without limitations.
185
“If anything is used too freely it loses its meaning.”(40) So LaVey teaches not to force
one’s self “to feel indiscriminate love” which he condemns as “unnatural.” This very
wmaturcdness is what leads the Christian evangelist or inquisitor to be able to say “I love
you,” or “I'll pray for you,” while harboring deep seated hatred or worse yet actually
giving the thumbscrews one more turn. Love should be given to those one loves, hate
should be given to one’s enemies.
The Fifth Statement — which extols vengeance, over “turning the other cheek” —
again relates to chapter V of the “Book of Lucifer” as well as to the most controversially
titled chapter “On the Choice of a Human Sacrifice” (Ch. DC). LaVey gives the moral and
ethical license to the true Satanist to take vengeance on his enemies— in a magical way.
This is done either through “Lesser magical” psychological methods or through a “Greater
magical” conjuration of destruction. It can not be over-emphasized that LaVey never
advocates “human sacrifice” as conventionally understood. What is advocated is the inner
freedom of Satanically aware individuals to “take justice into their own hands” and indulge
themselves in a healthy full-blown hatred for anyone or anything which has wronged them
sufficiently to deserve it. This is a powerful socio-political statement which speaks out for
the sovereignty of the Satanic individual over and above the collectivist state “justice”
system. It is almost as if LaVey could see the increasing and widespread breakdown in our
criminal justice system from his still relatively pacific late-1960s point in time.
Statement Six; “Satan represents responsibility to the responsible, instead of concern
for psychic vampires!” again has to do with the social relations of the Satanist and is further
expounded in chapter VII of the “The Book of Lucifer’’ in the Satanic Bible . LaVey has
always been most wary of people who attempt to ingratiate themselves with capable people
and begin to take from them more than they give in return— in whatever kind of human
relationship. These people he calls “psychic vampires.” Satanists will either get whatever
they need or want from their own resources or from others in a give-and-take relationship.
Statement Seven is essential to understanding the basics of LaVey’s theory of what
mankind is — his anthropology. He sees man as essentially “just another animal”— as a
natural creature b “beast of the fields.” But he must also account for man’s special status.
This he does by referring to man’s “divine spiritual and intellectual development.”
Although he may not find the words agreeable, he must concede that there is something
which separates humans from the “other animals.” LaVey views this factor as something
man simply puts to natural use— as increasing his capacity for viciousness. This
philosophical point on the true nature of mankind and the relationship between the
intellectual and bestial parts of man remain problematic in LaVey’s thought
Statement Eight: “Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical,
mental, or emotional gratification!”is a further expansion of Statement One. It is a specific
exhortation to indulge in those things which the collective or mass culture may call sins—
because by virtue of their very rejection by the mass they can be exalted as worthy
aspirations for the individualistic Satanist The Satanist uses “public opinion” as a “reverse
barometer” to analyze the social environment and to distinguish between the Satanic and
non-Satanic.
The Ninth Statement is the ironic “punch line” to the series. It states that historically
Satan has been an ally of the church, as he has kept the churches “in business”! But this is
not meant as flippantly as it might seem. The notion of “the other,” the “opponent”—
which is the essential meaning of the Hebraic term “Satan”— is always necessary to the
maintenance of a right-hand path institution or belief system— from the church to the
market place. The right-hand path must always have an enemy, while the left-hand path
somehow always seems to have to be that enemy.
186
The Nine Satanic Sins
(First published in the Cloven Hoof 119 in 1987)
These “sins” provide an invaluable negative mirror of the LaVeyan philosophy. In the
original presentation of the text each of these key terms is provided with a short
commentary.
(1) The first sin is stupidity and is indeed the is the primary Satanic Sin: “It depends on
people going along with whatever they are told.” LaVey views this as something the mass
media actually cultivate in order to dupe the masses— the Satanist must learn to see through
this.
(2) The second sin is pretentiousness which is seen as a corollary of stupidity as it is
one’s proclivity toward pretentiousness that is appealed to through flattery — “Everyone’s
made to feel like a big shot” — and thereby one is most easily manipulated.
(3) The third Satanic sin is solipsism , which according to LaVey is very dangerous.
This may also be because LaVeyan Satanism likes to think of itself as highly objectivistic,
and as the word is generally defined it conveys the idea that only the self exists — a radical
form of subjectivism. The world outside the self, and the relationship of the self — or ego
— to that world is essential in defining the life and at tainm ent of success for the Satanist.
The outside world must be controlled in accordance with the will of the Satanist— which is
reminiscent of the Epicurean attitude towards the external world.
(4) The fourth sin is self-deceit, which has already been cited as a highly undesirable
trait in the Third Satanic Statement In a way all of the other eight “Sms” revolve around
this key concept which may be distilled as a lack of self-awareness or self-knowledge.
Satanists must know themselves before they can indulge in those things which are truly an
expression of their unique existences.
(5) The fifth sin is herd conformity , which is especially heinous because not only
would one be giving up personal control or sovereignty— one would be doing it to an
impersonal collective mass. It is within the Satanic lifestyle to practice “dynamic
submission”— that is, giving over one’s loyalty or freedom for another’s use as long as it
ultimately benefits (fulfills the true desires) of the one who so submits him or herself. But
in this latter case it is very personal and individual.
(6) The sixth sin is a lack of perspective, which essentially means that the would-be
Satanist is not keeping his or her actions in “the wider historical and social” context If the
larger patterns are not perceived, focus is soon lost and the will of the “wannabe” Satanist
could be quickly led astray by the herd mentality.
(7) The seventh sin is what LaVey calls a. forgetfulness of past orthodoxies is part of
the lack of perspective— the lack of historical perspective. If one does not know the roots
of something it can easily be replaced by marketers as the “new” (and hence in the mass-
mid) “improved” model. The Satanist generally realizes that there can really be nothing that
is in its essence new. (41) The very ideology responsible for orthodoxy , i.e. the
standardized imposition of a system of beliefs/values over a whole population, makes such
forgetfulness possible (and profitable).(42)
(8) The eighth sin is termed counterproductive pride , which is something in which one
of the “Satanic virtues” — pride — can become a “sin” if it is out of balance with the
pragmatic goals of the individual
(9) The ninth and final Satanic sin is a lack of aesthetics, which is interesting because
so much of LaVey’s form of Satanism is built up along aesthetic lines. So much of Anton
LaVey is an artist — a musician, a painter, a weaver of tales — his “system” is largely a
product of aesthetic constructs. Aesthetics comes from the Greek word for the “senses”—
it is what is pleasing or pleasurable as sense data. Aesthetics have a subjective and objective
component, both of which should be observed and applied in Satanic activity. Ignoring
this, or not cultivating it, would be unthinkable in his world.
187
The Eleven Rules of the Earth
(First published in The Cloven Hoof March 1970, p. 3)
These “Eleven Rules” can be summarized as the Lex Satcmicus (Law of the Satanist)
which simply states “Do unto others as they do unto you.” Also included in this is the Lex
Talonis (Law of the Talon) which supports the Darwinian view of the “survival of the
fittest”
This body of laws may be taken as the essence of Satanic ethics as far as LaVey is
concerned. Long after these Rules were written LaVey railed against those who would call
themselves “ethical Satanists” because he felt this to be a redundant phrase.(43) However,
he does feel it necessary to spell out exactly what the ethics of Satanism are in these Eleven
Rules of the Earth— some of which consist of a codification of common courtesy.
The first three Rules involve not overstepping the bounds of respect for other people
i.e. Don’t give opinions or advice unless asked, don’t tell your woes to others unless
they want to hear about them, and when you are in someone else’s home, show respect, or
don’t go. People should be given their space— psychologically, emotionally and
physically, and one should be able to expect the same respect in return. But the fourth Rule
tells one how to deal with a person who does not respect one’s space: “...treat him cruelly
and without mercy!
Rule Five — “Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal” —
harkens back to the message of the first three as the would-be Satanist is warned against
making unwanted sexual advances. The Devil is always a gentleman and never an
overbearing oaf.
The Sixth Rule, which states that one should not take another’s property unless it is a
burden to the other person (!), is formulated according to a typically LaVeyan construct in
which victimizers, or predators, only make victims, or prey, of those who appear willing to
fulfill that role. The root of this construct or theme in LaVey’s thought is found in his
theories of Sado-Masochism discussed.
The Seventh Rule shows LaVey’s essential reverence and respect for the very idea of
magic. He admonishes the Satanist to acknowledge magic if it has been successfully
employed it to obtain some desire. LaVey maintains that if one denies magic after having
successfully used, one will then lose that gain. It is this technique of magic, rather than any
symbol of it — such as Satan — which is angled out by him for this level of reverence.
With the Eighth Rule LaVey returns to the two-edged construct of the victimizer/victim.
He admonishes the Satanist not to complain about things to which it is unnecessary to be
subject Only this time it is from the purely “Masochistic” side. If one does not need to
subject one’s self to a situation, yet continues in it, then perhaps it is because one does need
it after all. If so— there is no sense in complaining about it Such behavior would be quite
unseemly.
Rules Nine: “Do not harm little children!” and Ten: “Do not kill non-human animals
unless attacked or for your food!” are of tremendous ethical importance. Long before the
virulent and libelous “anti-Satanic” smear campaigns of the mid-1980s, in other words
before LaVey was really “defending” Satanism against any specific charges or accusations,
he was repeatedly on record as standing against die harm of children and animals (or non¬
human animals to be more accurate). This topic is also addressed in the Satanic Bible (pp.
87-89) in some detail.
The last Rule of the Earth — “When walking in open territory, bother no one. If
someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him!” — comes back to
the themes of the initial Rules. The Satanist should mind his own business when he is
outside his own “lair." If someone violates the Rules regarding him, he should inform the
other of the violation. Now, if the other does not heed the warning the violator must be
asking to be destroyed— and the Satanist is within his natural rights to oblige.
188
Throughout the 1980s LaVey made some interesting statements defining Satanism and
the Satanist which provide further insight into his doctrines in more recent years.
In 1982 he wrote “Satanism is more than a philosophy; it is a lone stand, a symbolic act
of defiance against thought suppression.” (44) In 1985 he provided a nine point definition
of the characteristics of a Higher Being— the deified Satanist Almost all of which LaVey
himself regularly violates. Among them are “don’t advertise” (!), “Be creative...never rip
off’ (!)— to name but two. Also among these characteristics is a bully-philosophy: “...
people will realize the benefits [of] contributing to your happiness, or the tough luck that
can befall them by getting you sore.” (45)
The next year LaVey defined Satanism again and defended his use of the term by
saying that his “brand of Satanism” is a conscious alternative to conventional and
institutional thought He identifies “Satanism” as a stimulating (or fun) name for the
exercise of innovative thinkin g which goes against the thoughtless conformity to
mainstream thinking in any avenue of life. Here he perhaps foreshadows the “recreational
religion” of contemporary society.(46)
The Satanic Cosmolog y
or
The World According to the Abominable Dr. LaVey
Anton LaVey is not, nor doe he intend to be, a systematic philosopher. He is more a
weaver of images— a sorcerous philosopher— a performance artist working in the social
and imagistic media of the latter 20th century. As such it requires some work, and, I hope,
some sympathetic understanding to illicit from his written works the essence of his
worldview. In many ways LaVey poses some new questions for the world-be follower of
the left-hand path. The role of society and of the interaction with other human beings (or
the lack of same) become essential to his Satanic philosophy. But equipped with the
analytical questions I have put to all the earlier schools of the left-hand path, the encounter
with LaVey’s Church of Satan yields a great harvest of new ideas about the nature and
scope of the path of the left-hand. LaVey’s Satanic cosmology will be seen to be
materialistic, cyclical, dualistic and limited. The problem of the position of the will of the
Satanic magician within this cosmos remains, however.
LaVey’s system of thought is based on a uniquely magical form of materialism. For
him all things that exist do so in a material form. There is no such thing as “spirit,” “god,”
or “heaven” as commonly believed in and taught by orthodox religions or held by popular
superstition. This theoretical idea is the proverbial forest of LaVey’s system which the trees
of individual manifestations of this concept sometimes obscure. It is easier to see the
materialism in his understanding of mankind or the workings of magic than in the
impersonal abstraction of cosmology. LaVey always begins and ends with concrete things
winch can be sensed . This approach rarely leads him off into abstract speculation.
For LaVey “God” (i.e. the ultimate power in the universe) is Nature and Satan is the
embodiment of Nature.(47) This is not to reduce LaVey’s philosophy to pure objectivistic
positivism. There is indeed, and perhaps somewhat paradoxically, a definite metaphysics
embedded in LaVey’s materialism. The world may be a material reality only, but its
functions can be so mysterious that vast amounts of its true character and structure remain
hidden from normal mankind’s view and understanding. For the most part man brings this
ignorance upon himself- it is simply more comfortable to be ignorant for most people. This
is why, as P. T. Bamum said: “There’s a sucker bom every minute.”
LaVey’s metaphysical materialism is not entirely original. He derives much of it from a
number of sources which seem to include the Epicureans (whom he sometimes
invokes),(48) de Sade (ultimately de la Metterie), Marx and Freud (whom he admires). It is
this long-standing tradition of philosophical materialism which more than anything else
LaVey identifies as the Satanic philosophy or tradition. Here he is very much in keeping
189
with the attitudes of the Slavs, both ancient and modem, who in their dualistic folk religion
identified God with the spiritual world and the Devil with the material one.
Cycles of Fire and Ice
The clearest statements made by LaVey concerning the abstract order of the cosmos are
concerned with cycles or rhythms . In the Satanic Rituals he wrote two pages (219-220)
under the heading: “The Unknown Known.” Here he outlines a theory of the successive
Ages of the world which cycle or oscillate between Ages of Ice in which “God” rules and
man (= Satan) is suppressed and Ages of Fire in which an rules and “God is beneath.”
These cycles are governed by the Law of Nine.
First there is a nine year period characterized by action, then a subsequent nine year
period characterized by reaction to that original impetus. Taken together the 18 year span of
time is called a “Working.” Nine Workings equal an Era (162 years) and nine Eras add up
to an Age (1,458 years) and nine Ages equal an Epoch (13,122 years).
The last Age of Ice came to an end in 1966. This pattern of oscillation between
extremes is the clearest abstract model for another leitmotif in LaVey’s thought dualism.
Dualism will be discussed at length in the next section, but another aspect of the cyclical
pattern must not be overlocked: that of rhythm. Perhaps welling up from LaVey’s obvious
native musical nature and talent is an inherent sense of rhythm. He often writes of the
importance of music to magic(49) and even concerning the primacy of rhythm over the
actual meanings of words in magical incantations. (50)
The role of rhythms in ordering the world is more specifically addressed in a Cloven
Hoof article in 1980 entitled “Megarhythms(51) Here LaVey claims to be able to chart
future public likes and dislikes “based on one simple rule: the attraction of opposites.” If
it’s in today, it’s destined by this megarhythmic law to be out tomorrow. The timing of
these shifts is presumably somehow coordinated with the oscillation process within the
Working 18 year period.
“Angles” form another abstract construct which gives shape to LaVey’s cosmology.
These “angles” — geometrical models which seem to have the power to create certain
effects in the objective and subjective universes— are most precisely discussed in a Cloven
Hoof article entitled “The Law of the Trapezoid.” This Law states that figures or spaces
made up of obtuse or acute angles (those less or more than 90°) have an unsettling effect on
the mind unless they are recognized as such— whereupon they can be empowering and
energizing. (52)
Supposedly when LaVey was investigating haunted houses earlier in his career he
discovered that it was not necessarily “departed spirits” but rather a by-product of the actual
geometry of the building or room in which the “haunting” was taking place that was
causing die phenomena.
Again this aspect of LaVey’s cosmology, or understanding of the world, can be derived
at least in part from one of his artistic interests— in this instance from graphic arts and the
influence of the theories of William Mortensen. See Appendix B for an outline of
Mortensen’s ideas. Certain shapes, angles and lines evoke first and foremost a visceral —
even if unconscious — fear. Fear is the most basic and powerful emotion known to man
because it is necessary to his physical survival. This remains so in today’s “civilized”
world, even if it is less obvious than in Ages past Hence knowledge of its power is more
useful than ever before.
LaVey makes his most magically potent statement on the power of the Angles in the
ritual text of Die elektrischen Vorspiele (The Electrical Prelude) first published in the
Satanic Rituals (pp. 106-130). The German text printed there is a (poor) translation of the
original English, not the other way around. There is no evidence for the validity of the
German versions of any of LaVey’s rituals. The original text, as performed on occasion by
LaVey in his early Church rituals, is printed as Appendix 5 in Michael Aquino’s The
190
Church of Satan. In this text LaVey speaks of a Barrier outside of which are predatory
beasts (“Hounds”) which can enter and exit this world through “angles” according to
certain “cycles.” there is also the dichotomy between “angles” and “curved dimensions”
(which are more of this world). The basic idea for this ritual came from the science-fiction
story “The Hounds of Tindalos” by Frank Belknap Long, who is one of the Lovecraft
circle. In a letter to Michael Aquino Long recollects having pulled the word “Tindalos” in
the title “out of thin air.” He said it might have suggested itself to him through the word
“tinder” as he was thinking of something fiery.(53) It is. however, more likely that this is
an example of cryptonesia and that somewhere Long had read about the Melanesian concept
of tindalo which is a “spirit” that can cause insanity when it possesses a person.
LaVey an Dualism
There is certain kind of “dualism” inherent in the very structure of the left-hand path
because its practitioners always seek to separate or individuate themselves from the
environment There is always a “this” and “that,” “self* and "not-seH” The right-hand path
practitioner seeks to destroy the distinctions and so can avoid this structural dualism but can
seldom avoid moralistic dualism between “good” and “evil”
Anton LaVey’s philosophy is founded on some basic dichotomies in the cosmological
psycho-sensual and sociological realms and his thought is otherwise peppered with dozens
of other dichotomies.
The main dichotomy is the cosmological one between matter and “spirit,” or more
accurately stated that between reality, or actual existence, and illusioc or conditioned
response. In a very real sense LaVey turns Augustine on his head and claims "being” for
matter and “lack of being” for the world of spirit For LaVeyan Satamsts it comes down to
seeing reality for what it is rather than allowing others to interpret and package a false
reality for them. Invariably when one allows someone else to create one’s cosmology the
creator always gains something. Satanists will therefore not allow this to happen,
preferring to base their cosmologies on the most objective facts known. Whether this
objectivity is most accessible in the world of the senses or in the world of the psyche is the
basic line of demarcation between the two modem branches of the ieft-hmd path.
Within the realm of the senses the principal LaVeyan dichotomy is between pleasure
and pain. There is nothing more basic — and hence more powerful — in hnman existence
and experience. LaVey’s works are laden with overt references to Sado-Masocihsm. This
is a complex topic in LaVey’s thought, and one better discussed in detail in connection with
his understanding of humanity in a later section. This dichotomy is so pervasive that it
seems part of his dualistic cosmology and not just a subjective creation of the human
psyche. The human mind simply perceives the universal dichotomy as pleasnre/pain.
In two 1980 Cloven Hoof articles LaVey explored the topic of eastress, which is the
opposite of “distress.” He theorizes that in today’s society distress is "so commonplace that
it represents comfort, security, and— fun,” that distressful simarions are transformed into
fiHStressful ones. According to LaVey people feel insignificant in today's world. ‘There is
overpopulation and underrecognition ”(54) They feel that way for the most part because
each individual really is insignificant in the larger scheme of things. But the individual
abhors this condition— it is really distressful. The whole marketplace of entertainment,
glamor, and so on, is geared to turn that distress into eustress (at a profit to the marketers).
This is done by misdirecting the individual’s attention to some vicarious existence— the
lives and fortunes/misfortunes of movie stars, sports figures— or soap opera characters.
The person is made to feel significant— for a price of some kind.
In the sociological realm LaVey’s dualism is equally profound. The most essential
element of this seems to be the dichotomy between the individual , or non-conformity, and
the collective , or conformity. This element or theme in one way or another underlies more
of his Cloven Hoof writings than any other. In his philosophy the summum bonum is
191
indulgence in the genuine desires of the individual carnal ego. In opposition to this stands
abstinence from those desires governed by collective dictates or religion, politics, fashion,
the media, ad infinitum.
The essence of LaVeyan Satanism is indulgence in individual desires according to the
conscious will of that individual separate from, and contrary to, the dictates of forces
outside the sovereign individuality. This is not as easy as the casual observer might
ass um e. LaVey points out that most things people “indulge” in are actually things they are
supposed to enjoy— according to their peer group, social stratum, or whatever. Most
people just go along with the herd and “enjoy” they things they are supposed to enjoy—
and then at the end of their lives wonder why they really had so little fun along the way. It
is to this kind of life that the non-Satanist is condemned. This conformity to the herd
mentality is the antithesis of structural Satanism. In the Middle Ages the “white lighters”
conformed to the dogmas of the church, today those same conformists are more likely to
kowtow to the dictates of political ideologies, trendy fashions or media generated
consumerism.
“The reason why an archetypical Satanist will eschew whatever is popular lies in his
disdain for and avoidance of whatever has been programmed for others.”(55)
So humanity itself is divided into two groups— the Satanic non-conformists who
indulge their genuinely individualized desires and the “rubes” who conform overtly or
covertly to the herd mentalities of religion, science, politics, fashion, the media, etc. The
self-aware Satanist is virtually always in a position to prey upon the rubes, the dupes of the
mass mentality. LaVey*s pointing out of this obvious fact makes his philosophy seem
especially “politically incorrect” to many would-be critics. Few like to be made to feel the
distress of their present condition.
The division of m ankin d into two classes, those in the know and the “marks” or
“rubes” is, on the surface at least, an aspect of LaVey* s philosophy illustratively drawn
from his carnival experience. But if we strip away the hypocrisy in ourselves we will see
that those same “metagames” so obviously and crudely played in the carnival are reflected
in most human endeavors— right up to the tops of our ivory towers and deep into our halls
of state.
This division between Satanists and the conformist herd is essential to the first point in
LaVey’s more recent “Five-Point Program”— Stratification.(56) This will be discussed
further in the “Vision” section later on. Stratification is the process of separating, or
creating conditions which will facilitate the separation, of the “weak” from the “strong.”
LaVey has always stood for such stratification and elitism based on merit and strength—
this is why he was apparently drawn to the philosophy of Ragnar Redbeard initially. For
LaVey there is the “higher man” (= the Satanist— by whatever name) and the “lower
man.”(57) The “higher man” is aware of all the metagames in life and knows how to play
them, while the “lower man** is merely a pawn in such games.
Besides these major dichotomies and dualities LaVey often invokes the dichotomy
between concepts such as the past and present, night and day (he detests the swn!), life and
death, silver and gold and dozens of others. At the same time he is aware of the dangers of
dichotomizing unproductively. He decries the “lower man’s** thought process — and his
language — as being “binaric.”(58) This idea appears based on some of George Orwell’s
theories about language and thought(59) “ Binaric is based on the premise that only one of
two choices can be readily processed by most ( including human) computers. There are no
shades of grey, so to speak. Either on or off, understood or not understood." (6Q) He also
rejects the labels of “white magic” and “black magic” (61) and in so doing says: “There is
no difference between “White” and “Black” magic, except in the smug hypocrisy, guilt-
ridden righteousness, and self-deceit of the “White” magician himself.” LaVey bases his
rejection on the prejudiced definition of “white magic” as that used for benevolent
workings, and “black magic” as that employed for malevolent ones. We have defined these
192
terms differently for purposes of this study. For LaVey, as for G. I. Gurdjieff, magic is
conscious doing.
Before I leave the discussion of LaVey’s dualism I would like to note that he harbors
two distinct types of dichotomies in this thought One is truly oppositional— such as that
between reality (“vital existence”) and unreality (“pipe dreams”) or between the individual
and the collective— while the other lies in a spectrum— such as that between pleasure and
pain, distress and eustress. The first kind expresses the essence of the role of the Satanist
as a categorical opponent or adversary to prevailing “norms” on a macrocosmic or
microcosmic scale, while the second kind refers to the magician’s ability to transform one
quality into another as an act of will.
The Power nf Limited Resources
LaVey, sometimes reacting to current popular ideas about “unlimited” human potential,
always champions the cause of limitation. First and foremost he sees this limitation as a
cold, hard, if unpleasant, fact But he also understands it as a potential source of real
power— as opposed to imagined unlimited resources.
I believe this attitude to be correlated to LaVey’s basic maierialism. In the “natural”
world we see that resources are limited and so there is no reason to assume, in LaVey’s
view, that this is not the case in matters of consciousness or human creativity.
In the chapter “Love and Hate” in the Satanic Bible (pp. 64-65) LaVey posits that in
reality the human capacity to love is limited. We can not love everyone. Love is a limited
commodity. Those who claim to love universally always hypocritically harbor even vaster
quantities of hate.
Tike Gurdjieff before him, LaVey holds that knowledge is also a limited commodity
because the brain’s ability to retain it is limited. Mr. G. openly stated thai knowledge was a
material substance. “I know damned well that a mind can only retain so much data ...
whatever new stuff that goes in, must boot some old stuff oul”(62) LaVey cultivates a
“trick” to ensure that his “knowledge bank” will retain its unique character. He calls it the
“augmentive principle.” New data will only be allowed entry if it directly relates to a
preexisting “favorite set of engrains.” It this way he believes himself able to arrest the
process of meaningless mental change for the sake of change and retain “what seems to be
the most valuable commodity in the world today: a strong, unique, personal and lasting
identity.” From a left-hand path perspective this speaks to the eventual necessity of
crystallizing an essence, which is self-defined and delimited, and which becomes the
subject of deification and eventual immortality. Despite LaVey’s efforts at packaging his
thoughts in a crude style (increasingly typical of his work after 1975) he here gives some
profound and sophisticated, yet practical and “down to earth” left-hand path technology.
Not only are there natural limitations in place which affect human knowledge and
creativity, but LaVey also sews the benefits of artificial restrictions on creative freedom In a
1981 issue of the Cloven Hoof he extols the virtues of censorship. This demonstrates that
the Black Pope is as able to “blaspheme” against the sacred cows of the “liberal
establishment” just as well as he does against those of the “religious right” To him they are
all the same anyway— rubes and dupes. He defends censorship — which is an artificial
limitation of artistic or intellectual freedom — based not on a desire to quell a certain
viewpoint but rather to encourage true creativity and vitality of imagination. A lack of limits
promotes sameness chiefly because artists are then free to practice excess which in turn
dulls the imaginative powers of the audience or readership. “Censorship is a means
towards personal freedom, the most personal of freedoms: a mind that can still function as
a creative and thinkin g tool, not by what it is ‘free’ to do in all its collective sameness, but
what it is motivated to do because of certain limitations ”(63)
193
LaVey’s extoling of limitations is, or can be, a hallmark of the left-hand path insofar as
it is a corollary of the necessity of separation of the self from the surrounding environment
and transforming it according to innate patterns hidden within. Without such limits or
boundaries the self or individuality is quickly swallowed up by the mass— and even more
quickly if that lack of limitations is promoted in the name of “individuality.” LaVey always
likes to point to the “hippies” of the late 1960s and early 1970s as examples of people who
walked in lock-step (peer-group approved clothes, drugs, opinions, verbal mechanisms,
etc.)— all in the name of “doing their own thing.”
Of LaVey’s many radical ideas none seems as radical as his proposal that Satanists
create and dwell in an artificial world and society of their own designs. Here he suggests a
new view of cosmology— one that is at once material and a product of the human
imagination. The fourth point of the Five-Point Plan is the design and manufacture of
androids to act as artificial human companions— or slaves. The fifth point of the Plan
extends this idea to Total Environments . These are to be privately owned and operated
communities — or Environments — which totally conform to the aesthetic wishes of those
living or visiting there. This is the basic idea behind LaVey’s earlier talk about the
establishment of “Pleasure Domes” in which the Satanist conld indulge his particular tastes.
In these Total Environments the Satanist would be free from a kind of “aesthetic pollution”
with which he is usually constantly bombarded— much to the detriment of his ability to
indulge in his desires.
Androids and Total Environments are logical cosmological conclusions to LaVey’s
cosmology— they provide a material (real) option for the true Satanist to indulge his highly
idiosyncratic tastes separate and free from the collective norms of society which are an
anathema to his view of “the good life.”
The Satanic View of Mankind
The human being is the central focus of LaVey an Satanism. It is through our humanity
we view the world— “Man is the measure of all things,” said the Sophist Protagoras— and
it is in humanity we find the ultimate godhead. According to LaVey’s philosophy, Satanism
is the true religion of mankind, by mankind and for mankind. At the core of his
anthropology is a carnal understanding which places a high degree of importance on the
erotic component in human life. This aspect is typical of philosophies having their origins
in this century— from the psychoanalysis of Sigmund Freud to the sexual religion of
Gerald Gardner.
Man = Beast = “God”
At least when t alkin g about the Satanist himself, anthropology and theology are
merged. But to the non-Satanist the study of mankind is closer to demonology. This is
because “white tight” religious systems equate “human nature,” the natural desires of man,
with manifestations of sin implanted by Satan. Indeed the “Satan,” the “enemy” or
“adversaiy” of the orthodox God is humanity itself— of which the image of Satan is a
symbol. This structure ensures that “Satan” will always be “tempting man to sin” and hence
he will need the church to absolve that sin. This is how “Satan” has “kept the church in
business all these years” (Ninth Satanic Statement)
The Satanist rejects this structure and embraces his own carnal individuality as the
focus of any godhead. Man is seen entirely as a creature of Nature— a beast or animal —
with no “spiritual” component “[Man] no longer can view himself in two parts, the carnal
and the spiritual, but sees them merge as one, and then to his abysmal horror, discovers
that they are only the carnal— AND ALWAYS WERE! Then he either hates himself to
death, day by day— or rejoices that he is what he is!”(64) The former choice of self-hatred
is that of orthodox religion, the latter choice of self-acceptance is that of Satanism.
Man is a natural beast— but self-aware in his bestiality— and since the true and only
God (= Satan) is Nature, Mankind is itself the physical embodiment of God as a self-aware
194
entity. In this way Mankind is that part of Satan (= Nature/“God”) which is aware of its
own existence.
If Man maintains a loving or respectful attitude toward himself, toward the true carnal
and bestial core self, then he will show love and respect for the most noble and pure
embodiments of that self, e.g. children, animals and other beautiful things. But if he is
filled with self-hatred he will wish to hurt and destroy any and all external symbols of
himself and his true nature. This is why so many “white light” religions have dying or
suffering “gods” and why they are so ready to sacrifice themselves or other things. ‘The
Satanist does not hate himself, nor the gods he might choose, and has no desire to destroy
himself or anything for which he stands!”(65)
Man as a Carnal Ego
The highest or most exalted element that defines the human being is the carnal ego. This
“carnal ego” is at once material — it is a part of the fleshly vehicle — and a matrix for
awareness. The ego — the T — is aware of itself as the subject (= doer) of the actions it
undertakes or wills. Man’s awareness of this carnality provides the highest form of
knowledge— the “Undefiled Wisdom.”
This is a point LaVey spends very little time elucidating. It remains a vague, yet vital
and implicit part of his comprehensive worldview. The philosophical problem that remains
is that as soon as I say “man is just an animal, which is aware of its animalness” I have
already myself made the essential distinction between man and animal: self-awareness. This
problem is not unique with LaVey, of course, all philosophies which see humanity as an
undifferentiated part of an all-encompassing Nature face this problem. Epicureans,
Enlightenment rationalists, Romantic vitalists, Marxists, and Anarchists all confront this
quandary. Man — consciousness — seems to be so much outside Nature, working
contrary to her “wishes,” rebelling against her constraints— yet there is no truly objective
and irrefutable evidence or data which proves the existence of some positive quality called
“spirit” or “intelligence.” The materialist simply posits that the laws by which matter is able
to produce intelligence are so complex and mysterious that they have not yet been deduced.
But in any event the idea of an invisible “spiritual” reality in opposition to this material and
vital existence has generally been used as a weapon against mankind since the be ginnin g of
history. LaVey’s religious philosophy calls for an end to “spiritual pipe dreams” and extols
the virtue of pure “vital existence.”
Satanic Society and the Invisible War
Anton LaVey has led a reclusive life, and increasingly so since 1975. During the same
period his writings have increasingly shown concern with social realities and problems
from a Satanic perspective. This focus on social, inter-human realities is understandable
from two angles. First, it is in keeping with the Satanic preoccupation with nou-conformity
with the “herd mentality.” Social norms help to define the limits of a possible Satanic
society. Second, as society is a matter of here and now existence it is of a higher concern to
the materialistic Satanist than any metaphysical speculations-
LaVey sees society as an important reality— albeit an often distasteful one. It, more
than anything else, is the matrix in which the LaVeyan Satanist lives. Society is LaVey’s
chief nemesis as he has observed how the “white light” value system has outgrown
medieval religious forms such as Christianity and become ensconced in the new media
dominated consumer society of the late 20th century.
As with most schools of the left-hand path, the Church of Satan proposes an elitist
design for society. The Satanist is someone set apart from and above the mass of
society.(66) What is more, the isolation from society the Satanist cultivates can, according
to LaVey, be a great source of power. In a 1990 Cloven Hoof article entitled “Power
195
through Alienation” he states: “A Satanist is not a revolutionary, but an alien, who by his
very alienation, is performing the ultimate revolt against the mindless drones who fear the
very rejection on which a Satanist thrives.”(67) By rejecting social norms and taking the
role of Satanist — the alien — the individual is progressively freed from the constraints of
society. At the same time LaVey derides the illusory “miserable quest for ‘individuality’”
touted as the norm for present-day society. Everybody wants “to be like everybody else”
and at the same time “think for themselves.” Hem the hopeless situation of the normal
person comes into sharp relief.
For LaVey society and its conformist norms acts as a great “resistor” to the Satanic will
to non-conformity. This resistance of the Satanic will is painful but also gainful— as
without the resistance the Satanist would be awash in undifferentiated possibilities.
Resistance leads to strength. But this is not a benign relationship. The conformist would is
seen as a great adversary bent on the destruction of the Alien, the Satanist— and so there is
now underway a great Invisible War.
The Invisible War was first mentioned by name in the second quarter 1986 issue of the
Cloven Hoof ; although it had really been an underlying theme from the beginning of the
Church of Satan. In this first discussion LaVey was somewhat vague about the parameters
of this war stating that it “is highly sophisticated, breaking down normal mental and
physiological functions until malaise, incompetence, or destruction befalls most
individuals.”(68)
The purpose of this war is the “containment and control” of individuals. Weapons used
in this war, also called World War HI, include weather control, viral and bacterial diseases,
ultra- and subsonic technologies, television, chemicals in food and beverages,
psychological smoke screens (diversions and misdirections from the true conflict), the
extended weekend (timer to consume and be further indoctrinated), and urban warfare (real
violence induced mainly through drugs).(69)
It is an “invisible war” because the enemies are not obvious— perhaps even to
themselves. The fastest way to identify the enemies is, whenever confronted with one of
the offensive weapons used in the “war,” to ask the question: “Who gains?” this question
usually renders some specific answers. But the true enemy lurks even deeper. The agents
of the enemy — actual people undertaking acts to the benefit of the enemy’s agents — keep
the secret even from themselves. “They can’t even be honest with themselves— so keeping
certain secrets is easy. If it means losing money unless they keep their customers believing
particular things, people will keep their mouths shut. If it means being hated and rejected
for what the secret hides, then it’s easy.”(70)
People can keep “monstrous secrets” because they have been encouraged — by the
opposing force in the invisible war — to forget who and what they truly are. LaVey writes:
“Forgetfulness, relinquishing your past, is demanded by the State— anyone who chooses
to disobey this rule is subject to substantial emotional and financial penalties.”(71) This
forgetfulness is equated with a mythic Greek “chair of forgetfulness,” analogous to
d rinkin g the waters of the underworld spring Lethe, and identified as a punishment It is
interesting to compare LaVey’s ideas on the virtues of remembering with those of G. I.
Gurdjieff (or Plato for that matter). For LaVey by remembering the past we preserve our
individual selves— and so become aware of who we really are. But as he usually does,
LaVey takes this idea and reduces it to an insight which prevents us from being “sold a bill
of goods.”
Tempting as it might be for some to dismiss LaVey’s ideas about the Invisible War,
many of his ideas seem valid and even obvious if one allows one’s cynical or harshly
realistic mind to rule rather than one’s sentimental fantasies and wishful thinking. Also, his
ideas are no less “paranoid” than a hundred special interest groups scurrying about the
contemporary scene— LaVey just puts them all together in a comprehensive vision.
196
“Satanic Sex”
This is the title of the sixth chapter of the “Book of Lucifer" in the Satanic Bible. There
can be no doubt that it was through sexual imagery that LaVey first brought great attention
to the Church of Satan— his naked altars, ‘Topless Witches Review/’ photo layouts in
“men’s magazines,” and so on.
In doing this LaVey was practicing a magical talent for using the timing factor. The time
— the late 1960s and early 1970s — was the time in which such imagery could be
effective, and it was. An early issue of the Cloven Hoof contains an indication that there
were three main reasons people were joining the Church: sexual freedom, furtherance of a
New Satanic Society, and the practice of magic. A new attitude toward sex and sexuality is
part of the late 20th century Zeitgeist Aiden Kelly has pointed out the intrinsic importance
of new sexual doctrines in the spread of modem witchcraft(72) — again especially in the
U.S. during the same period. But “Satanic Sex” is something quite different from any other
religious sexual doctrine. LaVey declares sexuality to be both of primary importance in
human behavior and that it is an area of life in which absolute and free indulgence should
be practices— which includes the freedom to indulge in abstinence.
“Satanic Sex” is utter sexual freedom. The only thin g about sexual practice that a
Satanist might feel “guilty” about would be, in the words of de Sade’s “Dying Man”: I
repent I only plucked an occasional flower when I might have gathered an ample harvest of
fruit..”(73) The essence of this philosophy is that of indulgence. One should fmd out what
one’s tastes and predilections truly are (apart from cultural and social pressures) and then
freely indulge these tastes. This includes the right to indulge in asexuality.
Even in the midst of the “sexual revolution” LaVey was astute enough to see the fact
that American culture remained (and would continue to remain, despite appearances) a
sexually repressed society. This is basically good news to the Satanist because of the need
for and existence of limitations which fuel the imagination of individuals. Many aspects of
the “sexual revolution,” e.g. the idea of sexuality as therapy (“Normal sex is good for
you!”), unisex fashions and altitudes (“There’s really no difference between men and
women”) and casual or “free” sex (“Everybody’s doing it!”), among other attitudes lead to
a reduction in the potential for real Satanic Sex. This is because Satanic Sex is based on
“fetishistic” or highly idiosyncratic sexual tastes, the sexual polarity between male and
female, and a significant emotional intensity.
Gender Politics and Imagery
Contrary to the general cultural drift toward unisex values and fashion trends of the last
two decades, LaVey consistently promoted a strict aesthetic distinction between the sexes.
He insists on the profound differences between men and women, which is consistent with
his more general theory of carnality. If the flesh is different in form, it follows that the
“soul” will be different in a corresponding degree.
LaVey’s most extended treatise on this difference is his 1970 book The Complete
Witch. The essential problem it addresses is the same as that of feminist literature of the
same period: How can women achieve or obtain power? In both the works of LaVey and
those of feminists, who would find this an abomination, it is generally conceded that the
male gender either possesses the power sought, or that it embodies or behavioralizes that
power. The feminist solution to the problem is for women to become more like men (in
image and values) that they will be able to wrest the power away from men themselves.
LaVey’s solution is for women to win a man and hold him with her particular feminine
charms— and thereby acquire whatever power he has or will have. LaVey wrote: “[I]f a
woman wants anything in life, she can obtain it easier through a man than another woman,
despite woman fiberationists’ bellows to the coutrary.”(74) Such statements demonstrate
197
his ability to be the Adversary, the Satan, of contemporary cultural fashions and trends as
much or more so than he is that of traditional orthodox “religion/’
Although LaVey’s stated preference is for men to be decidedly masculine and women to
be decidedly feminine, there is a deeper reality revealed in a 1978 Cloven Hoof article
entitled “Confessions of a Closet Misogynist.”(75) Here he discusses himself as an
example of a misogynist whose disdain for “soft, yielding, voluptuous woman” is based
on jealousy . Such a woman creates “dualistic yearnings” in the strongly masculine man.
“Essentially, a true misogynist is a straight man who, because he is a potential pushover for
women and realizes it, resents the power a truly feminine woman wields, wishes he had a
bit of it himself, secretly admires it, and seeks to capture it before it captures him ”(76)
These ideas flow from LaVey’s sophisticated conceptions about “epicurean sadism”
and masochism and his theory of the androgyny of the personality in which the majority
self made up of an apparent external personality which is a reflection of a core personality
very s imil ar to it The gender of this personality is the same as that of the body of the
subject However, LaVey theorizes that there is another, minority or demonic, personality
which lies between the outer and core selves. This has the gender opposite that of the
subject and contrasts not only sexually but also in physical type. It is to this type of
persona the subject will be naturally attracted sexually. (77) These general principles are
often applied by LaVey to a variety of studies in human behavior and society.
Another of LaVey’s sexually conditioued theories revolves around the power of early
erotic imprints on the consciousness of an individual. This phenomenon is called Erotic
Crystallization Inertia (ECI) by LaVey. Later in life the subject returns to the images
imprinted in his or her ECIs for vital sustenance. ECls are almost predicated on the idea
that the subject has a strong sexual imagination so that images not overtly related to simple
procreative functions of sexuality are endowed with by the imagination with tremendous
erotic power. Imagination — the power of the mind to creatively fill in or complete
situations it encounters with emotional or intellectual meaning only vaguely suggested by
the situation— is crucial to all of LaVey’s thought In many ways his Satanism is a
philosophy of the imagination.
“The Marquis LaVey”
In a discussion of the sexual connotations of LaVeyan Satanism the topic of Sado-
Masochism must be considered as a dominant theme. Theoretically it is in perfect accord
with the entire body of LaVey’s ideology. It is based on a carnal duality— that between
pleasure and pain, between predator and prey. This again indicates the pervasive principle
of there being polar extremes, positive and negative, active and passive, male and female,
between which there is a law of the “Attraction of Opposites.” Another principle of
LaVeyan thought, that of limitation or restriction leading to creativity, also plays a role in
his implicit doctrines surrounding Sado-Masochism.
The most comprehensive previously published view of this aspect of LaVeyan thought
can be found in the chapter “Masochistic America” in the book Secret Life of a
SatanistX 78)
Although primarily a sexual or erotic idea, Sado-Masochism is something LaVey sees
as a factor prevalent throughout society even in matters not considered overtly “sexual.” In
the relationship between the sexes, or between any two individual humans, LaVey always
observes a dominant/submissive model. One will primarily dominate the other, one will be
the master, the other will be the slave. But LaVey is quick to point out that there is also
power to be gained in being the slave— it just depends on who the master is and what the
slave gets in exchange for her (or his) slavery.
The whole idea of “eustress” in society already discussed has, according to LaVey, its
erotic corollary in Sado-Masochism. Punishment, initially an unpleasant thing, evolves into
a form of gratification, especially if it is handed out by a stimulating person.(79)
198
LaVey sees many “fitness” and “health” regimens of the recent past as eustress
phenomena— thinly disguised (though properly sublimated and sanitized) forms of
masochism. People bum themselves under the sun, exercise in ways designed to maximize
discomfort (“No pain, no gain!”), and starve themselves in strict dietary disciplines.
In the wider socioeconomic context inherent masochism is used as a marketing device
to ensure consumer anxiety and dissatisfaction (= pain), which can then only be
“alleviated” with products or consumer trends which are profitable, and which are usually
in an of themselves painful (physically, emotionally, financially, etc.).
LaVey views some elements of mankind (and especially womankind) as needing a
certain amount of misery, pain and slavery. This inherent need will play itself out in life
one way or another. If one is a “self-destructive masochist” this need will be played out in
unhappy circumstances of life. Real defeat and misery are the result But is one is a “self-
affirming masochist” who is conscious of this element in the personality and who exercises
it in a creative and self-aware manner, then the real defeat and misery will be exorcised in a
pleasurable and fun way.(80) The latter expressiou of Masochism is entirely positive and
self-affirming. All inherently masochistic people will be slaves, self-consciously
masochistic ones can choose their masters, while the zombie-slaves become the wretched
cattle of “the company,” “the cause,” “the job,” “the trend” or whatever impersonal
“master” presents itself.
LaVey demonstrates his personal experience with Masochistic women in his
understanding of the phenomenon of “aggressively passive” or “demandingly masochistic”
women— to whom the obliging and enthusiastic Sadist can soon become the slave.(81)
In keeping with his organic/materialistic cosmology, LaVey theorizes that women are
especially masochistic because they are endowed with great amounts of “excess energy.”
this can apparently only be relieved through physical means, and so he has suggested the
construction of “Auto-Erotic Agitation Tumblers” which vibrate and bounce the woman
around until sufficient excess energy has been released— and orgasm is adueved.(82) The
possible necessity for such devices also speaks to the general lack of men who can facilitate
similar results.
LaVey’s theories on Sadism are also interesting and sophisticated. He realizes the role
of the Sadist or Master as that of a facilitator of the self-aware Masochist’s experience.
There is a true exchange of power in which both gain something they inherently need. He
also recognizes the roots of the true Sadistic impulse not in hatred or anger, but in jealousy
or envy. He seems to see the Masochist or Slave as a projection of the Sadist’s or Master’s
own “demonic self’— which the Sadist then proceeds to train, control— and when
necessary punish.
The Sadist is also the Artist. Recall the profound definition of Sadeanism given in
chapter 6: “The pleasure felt from the observed modifications on the external world
produced by the will of the observer.”(83) This can also be true of the Artist or magician.
This “spur” which urges the subject to imagine something in the subjective universe and
cause it to come about in the objective universe is an essential component of LaVey’s
personal work. It recalls the myth of the misogynistic Pygmalion who created the sculpture
of Galatea — his perfect woman. He then fell in love with her, but her stony form was
unreceptive to his ardor. Aphrodite took pity on him and caused her to take on fleshly form
that she could be his wife.
It is interesting to note that LaVey named his second daughter Zeena Galatea .
Another phenomenon that LaVey connects with Sado-Masochism is lycanthropy, or
werewolfery. Some of his theories seem inspired by his favorite book on the subject: Man
into Wolf by Robert Eisler. In a 1978 issue of the Cloven Hoof LaVey first published his
essay “How to Become a Werewolf: the Fundamentals of Lycanthropic Metamorphosis;
The Principles and Their Application.” (This was then an excerpt from his then
unpublished Devil’s Notebook,)( 84)
199
The formula LaVey describes is one designed to transform the “civilized” man into an
instinctive sexual predator.
LaVey invokes the Mortensenesque emotional formula of sex, sentiment and wonder as
“triggering mec hanism s” for the metamorphosis from man into beast But he sees that in
the person undergoing the transformation there is a basically bipolar personality: the perfect
gentleman and the total beast.
The actual place where the metamorphosis occurs is one which has actually been
“charged” with repeated acts of predation— this atmosphere then continues to attract both
“hunters” and “hunted” alike. The hunted are attracted to the area because of the frightening
thrills evoked by the locus , while predators are attracted by the presence of their prey. (85)
The “preserve” can be a “lonely path through the trees”— but it could just as easily be a
singles bar or an S/M club.
In the game of predator/prey LaVey suggests it is optimal if willing partners are
involved. Lycanthropy is an indulgence by a “Higher Man” in his inherent bestial nature—
which will never be apart from him as long as he is human. Again we see ritualized
indulgence in behaviors otherwise considered destructive and certainly taboo.
The theme of Sado-Masochism is prevalent in the Church of Satan and not just a private
obsession of LaVey himself. Another 1978 Cloven Hoof article by Priest Paul Pipkin (a
real person, not a LaVey alter ego) is entitled “The Ritual Chamber at Roissy.” Hus is an
exploration of ritual and aesthetic themes drawn from Pauline R Cage’s Story ofO.
The elements of limitation or restriction (bondage, slavery, humiliation, submission),
dominance, predation (pain), gratification (pleasure), pride and mastery — and most of all
the realization of previously imaginary scenes — are all essential elements in both actual
Sado-Masochism and in the philosophy of Anton LaVey. He demands that society come to
a new understanding of terms such as slavery— to see diem for the reality they present and
to accept it Indulge it He suggests that men and women enter into a ‘‘private pact” to center
on the “master/slave component of a successful relationship”(86) — when such a
relationship is truly desired by the partners involved.
Even LaVey’s later obsession with droids can be explained from the Sado-Masochistic
perspective. If the master desires the absolute control or restriction of his Slave;— what
could be more restricted or controlled than an inanimate object? LaVey’s fascination with
androids (gynecoids?) is rather like Pygmalion telling Aphrodite: “I liked Galatea better as a
sculpture— turn her back to stone!”
It is no wonder that the ideas of de Sade on matters of sexuality are reflected in LaVey’s
philosophy since the very underpinnings of de Sade’s understanding of the world and
humanity’s place in it are so remarkably paralleled in LaVey’s own essentially materialistic
ideology.
Satanic Ethics
The writings of Anton LaVey give expression to an internally consistent set of ethics
which he considers innate in the Satanic philosophy. In what some might consider a
paradoxical and ironic way, the Black Pope is a man virtually obsessed with morality and
ethics. Machiavellian though these ethics might be, they are nonetheless strong and vital.
Just as the mythological, Miltonian, figure of Satan is an expression of rebellion against the
inherent cosmic injnstice embodied in Jehovah, Anton LaVey is an expression of outrage
against the institutionalized hypocrisy present in human society.
All of LaVey’s doctrinal works — the Nine Satanic Statements, the Nine Satanic Sins
and the Eleven Rules of the Earth — are essentially documents concerning ethics. They
provide the rationale for leading a Satanic life— a counter-morality meant to correct what is
seen as an inherently corrupt and unnatural morality dominated by guilt, self-abasement and
self-deceit LaVey does not propose doing “evil” instead of “good.” but like Nietzsche, he
200
urges the Satanist to go beyond these conventional categories imposed by illegitimate social
“norms” and to return to a natural morality innate within the fiber of the carnal ego itself.
The ethical system which emerges from these writings is really a hyper-traditional
one— one that harkens back to pre-Christian tribal ethics: You have the right and
responsibility to live, thrive and survive. Mind your own business as much as possible. If
another challenges you or tries to thwart you in your legitimate efforts to live, thrive and
survive— you have the right to destroy him. We owe our allegiances and loyalties to those
closest to us— we treat others according to their lesser status. Human relationships should
be even give-and-take affairs— there is no such thing as “charity.” Only enter into
relationships where this is true.
These are apparently natural ethics— intended to be free of hypocrisy. Other ethical
systems are thought to be flawed by the element of self-deceit or dishonesty inevitably
built into them.
Some aspects of LaVey’s ethical system seem to have an almost mystical component
about them. These are encoded in the Seventh, Eighth and Ninth “Rules of the Earth.” The
Seventh Rule involves giving credit to magic when you have employed it successfully. For
LaVey this seems to go beyond just magic and directly to the symbol or reality of Satan
himself. Magic is equated with the method of Satan— to deny magic or Satan seems an act
of dishonor to the Black Pope. He often condemns those wbo “Play the Devil’s game, but
deny the Devil’s name.” Honor and loyalty to magic and to its master, Satan, is clearly an
ethical principle with LaVey. The Eighth and Ninth “Rules of the Earth” express LaVey’s
almost mystical reverence for the life and well-being of children and (non-human)
animals — he holds their essence in true reverence.
Satanic Immortality
In the left-hand path systems the quest for immortality has always been central. In
LaVeyan Satanism the focus is on “vital essence” in this world and hi this life— on the
imperative to survive, to thrive and to LIVE. But this does not mean that the idea of the
survival of death itself is unimportant in the LaVeyan Systran. This is one of those instances
as with the use of magic, in which LaVey radically departs from the materialistic Epicurean
and Sadean foundations of his philosophy. Perhaps this is one of the reasons why the
possibilities of immortality of the ego are relatively little discussed in LaVey’s published
works.
Anton LaVey himself obliquely claims to have found the key to immortality. He boldly
claims that he won’t die. His beliefs hinge on an idea of “eternal awareness” based on will.
He also hints at belief in reincarnation when he says: “I will come back_"(87)
In chapter X of the “Book of Lucifer 7 ' in the Satanic Bible raraded “Life after Death
through Fulfillment of the Ego” LaVey writes: “It is [the] lust for life which will allow the
vital person to live on after the inevitable death of his fleshly sheik”
The implication of this and other statements is that there is some kind of substance or
energy not entirely identical to the body itself — which is the “shell" that “houses” it — and
that this substance can if it is vital enough maintain its existence after corporeal death.
What LaVey is primarily interested in is the continued existence of the self-aware
individual ego. there are very few indications of how this might be achieved but certain
features are clear. Vitality of the ego is of the utmost importance. Anyone who would
achieve immortality must live this life with a high level of intensity. Life is life— incarnate
or discam ate. This ego- or self-awareness must be unique and readily identifiable. Perhaps
it should not be overly complicated in image or content— a concentrated, vital and unique
substance has a better chance of survival than a diffuse, weak and ordinary one. the
technique of ECI — of attaching one’s vital ego-consciousness to certain scenes or objects
— can be of tremendous aid in this process. Also the fame of the individual is important
This vital ego should be well known to a wide number of living persons. This can act as a
201
support system for one’s immortal status— but only when consciously combined with
other factors*
In part of the Rcdbeard text. Might is Right , selected by LaVey to serve as his ‘‘Book of
Satan” section in the Satanic Bible we find the exhortation:
Make yourself a Terror to your adversary...
Thus shall you make yourself respected in all
walks of life, and your spirit— your immortal
spirit — shall live, not in an intangible
paradise, but in the brains and sinews of those
whose respect you have gained.
In ancient times much of this was part of becoming a divine hero, or being deified in
death— the Greeks, Romans, Germans, Slavs and Celts all deified uniquely heroic
individuals— in many ways LaVey (actually, of course, Ragnar Redbeard) seems to carry
on in their tradition.
Satanic Theolog y
For the LaVeyan Satanist no “theology” in the usual sense is possible. The theology
and the anthropology are virtually identical, and so the question of theology becomes
almost superfluous. God is Nature, but Nature is Satan—just as God is Satan: Hail Satan!
Behind these semantic shifts lies a coherent, if sometimes mysterious, view of the true
nature of “god” or a “theology.” The roots of this theological view can be seen in Epicurean
philosophy over the past two millennia. The Epicurean Roman philosopher and poet
Lucretius— although an atomic materialist — still spoke of the gods. He scorned as
destructive and hypocritical their worship by the masses, but explained these unwholesome
beliefs as ignorance of the true nature of the gods. The gods are simply extremely rarified
structures existing in absolute tranquility beyond the limits of the world as men know it
They are there, but subject to Nature’s laws and impotent to affect affairs on Earth. It is in
the patterns and models of Nature herself that the Epicurean finds the true concept of
“God.”
“God” as conventionally understood, more akin to the ancients’ belief in the gods, is
irrelevant to human experience. The complex patterns and models present in the whole of
Nature— both in this world and beyond it — is the only thing the LaVeyan Satanist feels is
worthy of the title “God.” But because the masses of people who have founded, and been
subject to, the religions of mankind have been incapable of knowing this they have based
their ideas about “God” on projections of their own fears, guilts and other short-comings.
The true “God” stands in opposition to this process— and therefore bears the name
“Satan.” this is the coherent complex of patterns and models governing the universe— but
not separate from it. Within the individual human being the presence of this coherent
complex of patterns is called the carnal ego. This is the representation, or the presence, of
Satan in the individual. It is carnal because it can not be separated from Nature, it is an ego
because it can be aware of itself and its own actions. It is the doer of all that is done— the
absolute subject (The word ego is nothing other than the Latin word for the first person
singular pronoun: “I.”)
Does Satan then have an independent, or “personal,” objective existence? In the earlier
years LaVey remained vague on this particular subject — obliquely referring to “the Man
Downstairs,” or to other quaint metaphors — but such a doctrine may have been a secret of
the Church. However, in later years he has insisted on Satan being “ouly a ‘symbol’” for
Nature itself. What is clear is that there is a model for the objective independent existence of
this complex of patterns— but that there is little evidence for its visibility as a “personal
deity.” To make it ontolgically personal would be tantamount to erecting a screen upon
202
which to project those petty human emotions of fear, guilt, pity and all the rest— thus
turning the true Other (= Satan) into just another one of the Same (= God).
Satanic Magic in Theory and Practice
For LaVey magic is the Satanic method in and of itself. He defines magic generally as
“The change in situations or events in accordance with one’s will, which would, using
normally accepted methods, be unchangeable.”(88) This definition obviously owes
something to Aleister Crowley’s definition.
As noted earlier, LaVey does not like to distinguish between “black” and “white”
magic. This is because he discusses the terms on a moral or ethical basis. All true magic
involves “ego gratification and personal power as a goal”— and so might be called “black”
but for the hypocritical stance taken by those who would call themselves “white magicians”
or “white witches.” In the historical sense LaVey is correct here. Since the Middle Ages all
magic has been considered de facto evil because it places (or can place) the will of the
individual above that of “God.” As the widely accepted definition of magic always places
the will of the magician in the central position, this assumption of the validity of individual
will over universal will continues to be essential It is for this reason that all magic might be
called “black magic” by those who decry as “evil” efforts to strengthen and fulfill their
egos.
Satanic Technologies
The Practice of Greater and Lesser Magic
The use of magical technologies for personal transformation— what might be called in
some traditions “high magic” — is little discussed in the Church of Satan system. This is
not because it is unimportant but because it is seen as being such an objective matter that no
amount of ritual or ritual technology could effect the actual transformation of an individual
from a 1° to a IV°— or even V° status. Such transformation is only brought abont through
the coordination and correlation of every aspect of a person's whole life toward such
magical goals.
Lesser Magic
In the Satanic Bible Lesser Magic is defined as “non-ritual or manipulative magic” and
is further characterized as “the wile and guile obtained through various devices and
contrived situations, which when ntilized, can create ‘change, in accordance with one’s
will.’”(SJ3, p. 111.) This type of magic has historically been called “fascination” or
“glamour”— but on a grander scale it might be called “propaganda” or “advertising.”
Lesser Magic works by means of psychological, or psychobio logical laws which are
known tot he magician— bnt which may be unknown to those upon whom the magic is
being worked. This type of magic works, consciously or unconsciously, through the media
of the five senses.
Some of LaVey’s theoretical base for his practice of Lesser Magic stems from carnival-
type experience. The tricks used by camey fortune tellers, stage hypnotists and others are
utilized here. Much of the content of The Compleat Witch is an outline of such techniques.
Many of these tricks have more recently been “made legit” couched in terms of “body
language” and some of the techniques of “Neurolinguistic Programming” (NLP).
Another major source of his theories concerning Lesser Magic is William Mortensen’s
The Command to Look . (See Appendix B.) Although this is not exactly clear in his
discussion on pages 111-113 of the Satanic Bible , the magician must first command a
snbject to look, to pay attention to the source of the forthcoming magical message— and
then the fasc ina tion can take place. The command to look is accomplished through a subtle
message of fear or danger, the fascination can then be effected by one of three means: sex.
203
sentiment or wonder. These are the only three things people are enduringly interested in—
and so they are the most powerful channels through which they can be inflnenced.
In the practice of Lesser Magic none of the five senses should be ignored. This is why
in the art of fascination, besides the obvious visual imagery, the voice (hearing), perfumes
(smell), food (taste), and touch should all be combined in an effective manner.
LaVey himself has been an obvious master of Lesser Magic over the years. He has
personally “charmed” most of those who have come into contact with him and has been
able to cast his charismatic spell on the world aronnd him. His striking physical
appearance, the fact that he is the almost stereotypical image of Satan himself, commands
people to look. His stories of magic, curses and other exploits at least seem to deliver in the
wonder category and thus rivet the observers’ attention. Formerly the sex category— with
his nude altars, topless witches, and so on, was also a greater factor.
Lesser Magic works through the five senses and appeals to primary human emotions in
a direct way making use of a wide variety of contemporary mythic symbols. Some might
argue that Lesser Magic is “just applied psychology” — which is certainly true. But then
again there is nothing really scientific about psychology as practiced on this level. The laws
are mysterious and shift from person to person and from situation to situation— and so the
discovery of methods that work in this field is as elusive as any Grail. Lesser Magic
constitutes a kind of meta-rhetoric by which magicians can persuade others to do their will,
or hold a certain opinion or feeling for not entirely conscious “reasons.”
Greater Magic
The other category of magic discussed by LaVey is ritual magic which involves a
formal ceremony which occurs in a special time and place. “Its main function is to isolate
the otherwise dissipated adrenal and other emotionally induced energy, and convert it into
dynamically transmittable force .”(89)
In this definition it is clear that LaVey sees Greater Magic as an entirely natural,
materially based, process. Its laws may be not entirely known and its application often
mysterious and more an art than a science— but its mechanics are entirely material.
An act of Greater Magic is, according to LaVey, to be driven by emotional not
intellectual concerns. Any intellectual work is done in preparing for the ritual— during the
ritual emotion, or chemistry, is in charge.
LaVey isolates five factors which most be taken into account for a successful act of
ritual magic:
1. Desire
2. T imin g
3. Imagery
4. Direction
5. The Balance Factor
Desire is the first factor: “If you do not truly desire any end resnlt, you should not
attempt to perform a working.”(90) A strong desire is necessary to success. Timing is a
complex factor. The magician must be at a moment of peak efficiency during the working,
while those whom he wishes to affect must be receptive to his “sendings.” The sleep cycle
may be important to this. LaVey suggests a window at approximately two hours before the
object of the sending awakens. But timing is a matte of such factors as biological clocks
and sleep cycles rather than mumbo-jumbo about the “hour of Venus” or whatever.
Imagery — non-verbal signals — is used to focus the emotions of the magician on the
object of his working. This could be done with drawings, paintings, sculptures,
photographs, articles of clothing, scents, sounds, music or whole scenarios incorporated
into the ritual. Imagery is then manipulated according to the aim of the working and is “the
very blueprint” which “becomes the formula which leads to reality.” Direction involves the
accumulation of emotional energy within the working and its release toward an effective
204
result Once the working is done no further expenditure of emotion should occur. After this
release the magician is free to expend his energies in more productive activities.
The Balance Factor : “One of the magician’s greatest weapons is knowing himself; his
talents, abilities, physical attractions and detractions, and when, where, and with whom to
utilize them!” {SB, 128) Magic can most easily be used to change things working for the
most part in harmony with Nature— makin g ouly slight alterations in the right place at the
right time to “tip the balance” in one’s favor.
As a rule for success the Satanist would never use Greater Magic where the techniques
of Lesser Magic could be more easily employed. Greater Magic is reserved for those
situations where it must be used
In practice LaVey is the greatest pioneer in the field of what might be called pragmatic
magic . All the elements in his magical system are there to act as triggers for certain
psychological effects— nothing is there because “it’s just traditionaL” The only rule seems
to be that “if it works, do it, if it doesn’t work, leave it out or find something that does.”
The Satanic Bible contains the formnlas for three basic conjurations: lust (sex),
compassion (sentiment), and destruction (wonder)— again the influence of Mortensen’s
theories are felt These are the three main motivations for the performance of Greater
Magic, according to LaVey. Lust is for gaining a lover, compassion for personal power
and destruction for the venting of anger or hate.
Characteristic of modem left-hand path magical systems, there is no standard Satanic
ritual which is repeated ad nauseam such as the Roman Catholic Mass. Each Satanist is
encouraged to create his or her own rites suited to individual or group needs. But there are
some pragmatic steps used (especially for group workings) which are designed to ease the
ability of the will to trigger the most effective psychological responses.
LaVey outlines 13 steps which are designed first to create an atmosphere isolated from
outside influences and charged with emotionally stimulating sounds, symbols, and so on,
then to direct all of the accumulated emotional energy toward the desired goal, and then
finally to re-enter the atmosphere outside the chamber. All of the prescriptions of specific
ritual elements are really in place as suggestions on how things might be done— but in
individnal practice things might be performed in a variety of different ways. There is
usually a fairly standard opening sequence involving ringing a bell nine times, invoking the
Powers of Darkness, d rinkin g from a chalice (to link the celebrant with the powers
invoked), invoking the cardinal points— and a benediction with a phallus. In the space
following this sequence comes the working itself which may be highly individualized. In
conclusion there is another brief closing sequence including the ringing of the bell nine
times and the final words: “So it is done!”
Satanic Psychodramatic Magic
The elaborate rituals staged in the Black House until 1972 were for the most part
psychodramatic workings of Greater Magic. That is to say, they were not meant to change
the outside world so much as they were designed to alter the feelings and attitudes of those
participating in the ritual— to free them of detrimental emotions (such as fear, guilt, etc.) or
to give expression to forbidden desires, feelings, or thoughts.
The Satanic Rituals is a collection of this type of psychodramatic ceremonies. The
“Black Mass” is the premier Satanic psychodrama. But its formula is usually
misunderstood by non-Satanists. As LaVey writes in the Satanic Bible: “A black mass,
today [1969], would consist of the blaspheming of snch ‘sacred’ topics as Eastern
mysticism, psychiatry, the psychedelic movement, ultra-liberalism, etc...”(5i?, p. 101) A
“traditional” Black Mass, a direct parody of the Roman Catholic Mass, would only be used
as a psychodramatic ritual to help ex-Catholics “deprogram” themselves. (This would be
especially valuable for all those who were institutionally abused by the church in their
younger years.)
205
LaVey points out that the whole idea of the “Black Mass” is most certainly first a
propagandists creation of the Chnrch which was then later embellished in literary works
for pure shock effects. But this history dose not lessen its potential effectiveness for ex-
Catholics or others raised in rigid religions to break their psychological ties with their old
faith. They are then free to move forward to discover their own religious values apart from
those programmed into them by others. The Black Mass is simply a ritual formulation of
the antmoinian process inherent in the practice of the left-hand path generally.
“The Ceremony of the Stifling Air” is another form of the Black Mass with a psendo-
historical connection to the story of the suppression of the Knights Templar by the king of
France (Philip the Fair) and the Pope (in 1331). Das Tierdrama (“The Drama of the
Beasts”) is a celebration of the Seventh Satanic Statement: “... man is just another
animal...” It teaches humans to exult in their anim al nature, to embrace and accept it “The
Homage to Tchort” is LaVey’s celebration of the fleshly and libidinous appetites of his hero
G. Y. Rasputin.
These and other psychodramatic rituals practiced — or suggested — by the Church of
Satan material are designed in some sense to make subjective changes in the celebrant(s)
and/or to teach or illustrate some philosophical or historical idea within the Satanic
tradition. That they are sometimes fictional creations — or even based on fictional creations
(such as the Lovecraft rituals in the Satanic Rituab)( 91) makes them all the more Satanic.
The true Satanist is free to create his own “religion” or to accept or reject elements of pre¬
existing systems according to his needs or will.
Psychodramatic rituals allow the Satanist to do more than just read about strange
practices and beliefs. They allow the participants to experience these practices in an active,
living way. Such rituals are another form of indulgence in which the participants enter into
new and different world views, try them on for size, and take from them what they want or
need from experience.
Erotic Crystallization Inertia
One of LaVey’s most nnique contribntions to magical technology is the theory and
practice of ECI— Erotic Crystallization Inertia, also known as Emotional Crystallization
Inertia. No other concept is more important than ECI to a comprehensive understanding of
LaVey’s system.
According to LaVey there are certain moments in life, usually in adolescence or young
adnlthood, in which we suddenly and vitally become self-aware. These moments are
always emotional, and usually erotic in nature. In the glossary of LaVeyan terms given in
Blanche Barton’s Secret Life of a Satanist ECI is defined as: “The point in time and
experience in which a person’s emotional/sexual fetishes are established.” (p. 229) these
are usually visual stimuli and subsequent memories of them. An ECI moment gives
pleasure and joy, and from that joy comes strength and vitality. For this reason, if a
magician surrounds himself with things which stimulate his ECI moments or periods in
life, he will be more vital and live longer in his vitalized state.
LaVey first wrote about ECI in a 1973 issue of the Cloven Hoof in an article entitled
“Erotic Crystallization Inertia (E.C.I.): Its Relationship to Longevity.” There he wrote of
how older people like to remain in (or move to) environments — small towns, old folks’
homes — where the fashions and visual stimuli tend to remain the way they always were or
actually revert to times past This is actually stimulating and invigorating to the old
people— the trendy fashions of younger generations would actually be detrimental to their
vitality.
In subsequent contribntions on the topic of ECI it becomes progressively clearer that
LaVey is developing a new category of magical philosophy with ECI.(92) By consciously
indulging in ECI-stimuli the magician preserves and maintains his vitality and vigor, his
memories and kept intact and thus his longevity is extended— perhaps beyond death. The
206
ECI magician might build a room or seek out an environment similar to that in which his
ECI moments were first generated— he might listen to music associated with them, smell
odors, feel textures, taste foods and drink— but most of all re-view his ECI visions. All of
these things are imprinted in the mind at moments of strong self-awareness and vital
pleasure— this is why we remember them so vividly and are inexorably attracted to things
that remind us of them. Consciously re-connecting with these stimuli (either physically or
in our imaginations) virtually “feeds” onr carnal egos with the vital sustenance it needs to
thrive.
In a basement room of the Black House LaVey built a replica of a seedy old hotel room
(circa 1945): “Outside die single window it is always night and always raining and the
intermittent flash of a neon sign pulsates...”(93) This is an ECI ritual chamber for LaVey—
perhaps a replica of the room where young Tony had his first sexual encounter? His
magical interest in old songs, old cars, and “out-of-date” fashions all stem back to this
technique of ECI, He “blasphemes” against such pieces of “conventional wisdom” as:
“You’ve got to keep up with the times or life will pass you by," or “You can’t live in the
past” On the contrary, he says if you are to live in any vital way you must remain true to
those things which make you vital, which stimulate you in reality— not those newfangled
things advertisers want you to buy.
ECI stimuli along with the progressive isolation and distillation of the unique individual
ego of a person (perhaps coupled with the creation of a static controlled “society” in the
form of androids) form elements in a comprehensive magical approach to longevity and
even immortality.
Trapezoidal Magic
No area of LaVey’s magical knowledge has remained more mysterious and perhaps
“sinister” than that connected with the symbol of the Trapezoid. We have already discussed
his “Law of the Trapezoid” but his use of this symbol goes well beyond that law. The
magic connected with the Trapezoid has a unique character, unlike any other school of
magic. Little to nothing has been written about it outside the internal documents of the
Church of Satan and the Temple of Set
In theory Trapezoidal magic makes use of geometrical manipulations of the ritual
environment (visual and spatial), the creation of certain electromagnetic fields in the
chamber (ozonization, ionization, extremely low-frequency [ELF] waves in the
atmosphere) and the manipnlation of light and sound waves to establish ideal
psychophysiological conditions for the focus, concentration and projection of the will of
the magician to any part of the universe. To do this often technical apparati such as Tesla
coils, Jacob’s ladders. Van de Graaf generations, strobe lights, ionizers, etc., are used in a
ritual context
The only commercially available example of this kind of ritual is published in LaVey’s
Satanic Rituals in the form of Die elektrischen Vorspiele. The connections between this
kind of magical technology and Nazi Germany, as suggested by LaVey in this section of
the book, are indirect at best This type of magic was, however, extensively explored by
pre-war occult groups in Germany. Most of what appears in the ritual in question is the
product of LaVey’s magical synthesis and imagination.
At present such magical explorations ar an ongoing concern and area of expertise in the
Order of the Trapezoid within the Temple of Set
207
The LaVeyan Vision
Anton Szandor LaVey is a man with a Hell of a Vision. His written works are full of
predictions for the future and magical declarations of how he and the Church of Satan have
changed or will change the Is-To-Be, as he calls the future. A review of his visions will,
however, reveal a growing pessimism in his thought.
During the first ten years of the Church of Satan LaVey held visions of the
establishment of publicly institutionalized Satanic Churches— crosses were to be cast
down from the steeples and tridents put in their stead. In 1972 LaVey was ready to relegate
Christ to the category of “A well-known folk myth” by the year 2000 CE.(94) the Church
was to establish “Pleasure Domes” for the practices of the indulgences of its members.
After 1975 these grandiose visions for the Church of Satan became much more modest—
and with the expected “backlash” of the 1980s such visions seemed far away indeed.
But according to LaVey’s cosmological scheme of Ages this Satanic Age — or Age of
Fire — is just underway and will not reach its zenith of power until the year 2695. In these
first few Workings (nine year periods) a number of set-backs (dne to reactive forces) can
be expected. In more recent visions of what the Church of Satan will become, LaVey has
seen it more as an “underground” subcultural or ji/per-cultural phenomenon— as it will be
at the highest levels of the culture but outside the normative mainstream.
LaVey’s most recent vision casting into the Is-To-Be is his Five Point Program of
Pentagonal Revisionism:(95)
1. Stratification
2. Taxation of All Churches
3. Return to the Law of the Jungle
4. Development and Promotion of Humanoids
5. Development and Promotion of Total Environments
These are the things LaVey thinks Satanists should be working toward and focusing on
in the near future. Notice that all are essentially social phenomena— not primarily personal
magical ones.
Stratification is a process in society by which the elite, “Satanic cream,” will rise to the
top. This is to be accomplished through selective breeding (eugenics), elitist stratification of
the social order, re-establishment of polygamy based on eugenic criteria and the eventual
establishment of separate communities of Satanists based on these principles.
Churches should and must be taxed like any other corporation. This attitude perhaps
stems from the fact that LaVey never incorporated the Church of Satan as an actual legal
church at all, and has run it as a sole proprietorship for all these years.
The Law of the Jungle — or Lex Talonis — as outlined in LaVey’s “Eleven Rules of
the Earth” is the true Natural Law and in the Satanic Age there will be a return to this
natural form of ethics and morality.
Humanoids — sexual robots — are important to LaVey’s vision of the future because
they will be able to satisfy the desires of men and women in the sexual marketplace withont
or spreading disease or spawning genetically inferior offspring which are now taxing our
cultural system to death. The subject of such robots became a dominant theme of LaVey’s
writings in the mid- 1980s.
‘Total Environments” can be construed on the one hand as commercial enterprises —
like amusement parks — which create alternative worlds in which like-minded people can
live together (for a fee). But on the other hand, they could be seen as the Satanic
communities of the future. These are the old “Pleasure Dome” idea at a fuller state of
maturity.
208
LaVey’s power of vision, similar to that of Karl Marx, is one part predication or
interpretation of historical cycles and one part operative magic— as he nudges events in the
predicted (= wished for) direction. Historically LaVey has stood for a eugenic solution to
many of our social problems. As time has gone on his conviction in this area seems to have
become stronger. The breeding of a New (Satanic) Race is nothing new in the history of
thought Plato suggested it in The Republic and National Socialist Germany had had plans
for such an undertaking, of course. LaVey’s championing of this cause is very much in line
with his general philosophy based on the paradoxical balance between materialism and
magic, eugenics is straightforwardly the magical principle of “causing changes to occur in
conformity with will” as applied to the very material (DNA) of which the carnal ego is
made. Here again the Black Pope blasphemes against yet another of the “sacred cows” of
the latter half of the 20th century (though certainly not the first half)— that all individuals
are somehow genetically equal— and if not, steps should be taken to ensure that they are
made equal.
Anton LaVey and the Left-Hand Path
Obviously LaVey and his Church of Satan belong to the left-hand path as it has been
defined in this book. He was perhaps the first, and certainly the most vocal, to claim
allegiance with the left-hand path in western culture since ancient times. LaVeyan Satanism
vir tuall y defines the Immanent Branch of the left-hand path as it is practiced in the western
world today. Still, whether we speak of the Immanent or the Transcendental Branch, the
same criteria of antinomianism and mitiatorily magical deification of the individual self are
valid.
LaVey’s philosophy is a perfect example of external antinomianism. He enthusiastically
embraces any and all symbols of “consensus evil” — relishing his self-chosen role of the
ultimate and absolute Adversary or Opponent: Satan. Furthermore, he extends this concept
beyond traditional religious contexts into the secular or “real world.” This is essential in a
modem age in which the former Judeo-Christian symbolism has become increasingly
anachronistic.
It is one of the main nnderlying principles of the Church of Satan doctrines that the
individual carnal ego can realize its own “godhead,” as LaVey puts it It seems likely that
LaVey’s own personal ideas on this essential and implicit point of his over all philosophy
have not been fully expressed. The general methods of such self-deification can be deduced
as much from LaVey’s own personal behavior and history as from what he has written
over the years.
Magic is the essential method employed in LaVey’s system. His magic as seen in the
Satanic Bible may seem simplistic when compared to the complex rigmarole found in
systems snch as that of the Golden Dawn, but this is deceptive. Actually LaVey’s system
demands that Satanic magicians really know themselves and pragmatically apply the
principles of the system in ways unique to themselves. In addition, many of the general
principles are ones otherwise unknown in the magical traditions of the occult revival—
EC I, Law of the Trapezoid, Command to Look systemics, etc. This in fact makes LaVey’s
magics much more intricate than the recipe-book approach of most others. Magic, for
LaVey, is a way for the individual carnal ego to demonstrate its freedom and potency in the
world around it— in this life and perhaps beyond it
The individual is supreme in LaVey’s form of Satanism. This may be why it has
proved almost impossible to organize and maintain an organization of LaVeyan Satanists.
LaVey himself has been far too absorbed in his own world to care very much about what is
occurring in the outside world beneath the Sigil of Baphomet If he had had a burning
desire to put himself at the center of an adoring mass of followers whose lives he controlled
ala A. Merritt’s Satan he could have done that and his life would have been very different
209
But he chose himself and his own world— true to the individualistic essence of his
philosophy. .
Initiation: the idea that one gains mastery in gradual stages in an idea generally
supported by LaVey’s system. At one point in die history of the Church (1969-1975) this
became formalized, but subsequent to that time less so. A formal system of initiation
requires the “recognizing entity” to be intimately knowledgeable and involved with the
person being recognized to the various levels of initiation. LaVey is essentially too ego- or
self-centered to delegate such authority or to become so involved with the initiation of
others at all. Again, this seems consistent with his general system of ideas. LaVey opted
for an initiatory system in which his personal intuition and/or factors in the secnlar,
objective world do the work of recognition.
Anton LaVey’s principal contribution to the history of the left-hand path in this century
is his unequivocal evocation of the very image of the Judeo-Christian Satan as an object of
veneration and his own identification with not only that image but that name as well. While
playing the Devil’ game, he took the Devil’s name as his own. He has even goes so far as
giving his only begotten son, a child born to him and Blanche Barton on Halloween, 1993,
the very name Satan.
Many have found that this chapter probably goes too far in providing the LaVeyan
philosophy with a coherent system. In essence, the philosophy seems to be an eternally
adolescent one: “Have fun. Read scarry stories. Play music.” The rest seems probably to
have been created for effect only, or for the sake of image. However, even if it was by
accident, the system LaVey created out of the dead parts of half-forgotten books will
continne to have a fascinating potential, and it is hoped that this study has done the justice
to it which it deserves.
It must also not go unnoted that few other members of the fraternity making up the
Lords of the Left-hand Path can be said to have been so ideologically passive . It might be
said that LaVey is in any ways a chameleon— who takes on the ideas of not only the books
which surround him, but also of the members of his entourage. It is tempting to conclude
with Lawrence Wright that the LaVey story is one of a “bookish musician”(96) who has
taken us all for a ride into not only his dark-side, but to the dark-side of modem American
life. .
What the legacy of Anton LaVey and the Church of Satan will be in the next century is
an open question. Since no organizational or corporate identity exists beyond the
personality of the founder of the “Church” it is most likely that various interests will
compete for the LaVeyan legacy, and only the fittest will survive that competition.
In as many ways as LaVey seems to be a man bom too late— whose true home is in the
not-too-distant past — he seems also to be a man bom to soon— whose home is in the Is-
To-Be.
Yn’khe Rohz
210
Notes for Chapter 9
(1) Robert Wistricb, Who’s Who in Nazi Germany (New York; Macmillan , 1982), p. 126.
(2) See Colin Wilson, Rasputin (Secaucus, NJ: Citadel, 1964).
(3) Twain’s two works most admired by LaVey are No. 44, The Mysterious Stranger (Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1969) and Letters from the Earth (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1962).
Both were severely “edited” (censored) in earlier editions because of the anti-Christian sentiments expressed
in them.
(4) Burton Wolfe, The Devil’s Avenger : A Biography of Anton Szandor LaVey (New York: Pyramid,
1974), pp. 31-32.
(5) See Michael Aquino, The Church of Satan (San Francisco: Temple of Set, 1989, 2nd ed.).
Appendix 19.
(6) See Aquino, Church of Satan, Appendix 11.
(7) Wolfe, Devil’s Avenger , p. 27 and Blanche Barton, The Secret Life of a Satanist (Los Angeles:
Feral House, 1990), p. 23.
(8) Lawrence Wright, “Sympathy for the Devil" Rolling Stone (Sept 5. 1991), p. 66.
(9) Wolfe, Devil’s Avenger , p. 33 ff. and Barton, Secret Life, pp. 29-37.
(10) Wright, “Sympathy for the Devil,” p. 67.
(11) Barton, Secret Life, pp. 45-53.
(12) Scroll of Set, XVH:3 (June, 1991), p. 8.
(13) Wolfe, Devil’s Avenger, 50 ff. and Barton Secret Life, p. 59-60.
(14) Wright, “Sympathy for the Devil” p. 68.
(15) Scroll of Set, 17:3 (June, 1991), p. 7.
(16) Barton, Secret Life , pp. 93-114.
(17 ) Scroll of Set 17:3 (June, 1991), p. 8.
(18) Anton LaVey, The Compleat Witch (New York: Dodd and Mead, 1971). pp. 100-101.
(19) Michael Aquino, “Lovecraftian Ritual” Nyaalops, 13 (May, 1977). pp. 13-15.
(20) All of the Church of Satan Conclaves are replied by Aquino, Church of Satan, passim.
(21) See Aquino, Church of Satan, A-33 and Anton LaVey (= John M. Kmand). “An Explanation of
the Various Degrees in the Church of Satan” Cloven Hoof 2:11 (November, 1970), p. 7.
(22) = Cloven Hoof 8:3 (May/June 1975), p. 1.
(23) Aquino, Church of Satan, p. A-142.
(24) Aquino, Church of Satan, Appendix 143.
(25) John Fritscher, “Straight from the Witch’s Mouth” In: Popular Wachcrafi (Bowling Green, OH:
Bowling Green University Popular Press, 1972), pp. 89-90; 107-123.
(26) See Barton, Secret Life, pp. 235-242.
(27) Barton, Church of Satan, 17.
(28) Randall H. Alfred, “The Church of Satan.” In: The New Religions Consciousness. Eds. Charles
Y. Glock and Robert N. Bellah. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976), 180-202.
(29) Marcello Truzzi, “The Occult Revival as Popular Culture” Sociological Quarterly 13 (Winter
1972), pp. 16-36.
(30) See Bartou, Secret Life, 235-242.
(31) LaVey, “An Explanation of the Various Degrees in the Chinch of Satan” Cloven Hoof 2:11
(1970). p. 8.
(32) Alfred, “The Church of Satan” p. 191.
(33) Anton LaVey, “The Order of the Trapezoid.” Cloven Hoof (112) 17:1 (1985), p. 3.
(34) Anton LaVey, “Untitled Editorial.” Cloven Hoof 4:3 (March, 1972) p. 12.
(35) Blanche Barton, The Church of Satan (New York: Heirs Kitchen Productions, 1990), p. 122.
(36) Anton LaVey, “Hoofhotes.” Cloven Hoof 8:1 (Jan ./Feb.,1976), p. 2.
(37) Anton LaVey, “The C/S, Cosmic Joy Buzzer.” Cloven Hoof (60) 8:2 (Mar./Apr., 1976), pp. 3-4
and Barton, Secret Life, pp. 248-52 and Church of Satan, p. 122
(38) Barton, Church of Satan, p. 122.
211
(39) Anton LaVey, “Working at Having Fun.” Cloven Hoof 4:5 (May/June, 1972), p. 20.
(40) Anton LaVey, The Satanic Bible (New York: Avon, 1969), p. 64.
(41) Anton LaVey, “What’s New? Not Much” Cloven Hoof (74) 10:4 (July/Aug„ 1978), pp. 3-4.
(42) Anton LaVey, “Don’t Recycle Your Brain” Cloven Hoof (115) 19:1 (1986), p. 1.
(43) Anton LaVey, “For the Record” Cloven Hoof (122) 20:4 (1987), p. 4.
(44) Anton LaVey, “Untitled Editorial.” Cloven Hoof (96) 14:3 (1982), p. 1.
(45) Abbreviated from an untitled editorial in the Cloven Hoof (113) 17:2 (1985), p. 1.
(46) Anton LaVey, “Satanica.” Cloven Hoof (111) 19:3 (1986), p. 1.
(47) Wright, “Sympathy for the Devil” p. 105.
(48) Anton LaVey, “Misanthropia.” Cloven Hoof (67) 9:3 (May/June, 1977), p. 3 and “Confessions
of a Closet Misogynist” Cloven Hoof 75 (1978), p. 4.
(49) Anton LaVey, “Music for the Ritual Chamber.” Cloven Hoof 4:7 (1972), 27-30, “Illegal Music
Cloven Hoof (11%) 19:4 (1986), p. 3 and “Music for the Chamber.” Cloven Hoof (118) 19:4 (1986), pp. 2-
3.
(50) Anton LaVey, “Rhythm, Cadence, and Meter The Foundation of Invocation” Cloven Hoof (112)
17:1 (1985), p. 1.
(51) Anton LaVey, “Megarhythm” Cloven Hoof (^5) 12:4 (1980), pp. 1-2.
(52) Anton LaVey, “The Law of the Trapezoid” Cloven Hoof (64) 8:6 (NovVDec., 1976), p. 2.
(53) Aquino, Church of Satan, p. 208.
(54) Anton LaVey, “The Threat of Peace.” Cloven Hoof (86) 12:5 (1980), p. 1.
(55) Anton LaVey, “Today’s Madness is Tomorrow’s Norm ” [Reprinted from Cloven Hoof Sept./Oct.
(1975)] Cloven Hoof( 84) (March-June, 1980), p. 1.
(56) Anton LaVey, “Pentagonal Revisionism: A Five-Point
Program.” Cloven Hoof (124) 21:2 (1988), pp. 1-2 and Barton, Secret Life, p. 259.
(57) Anton LaVey, “Binaric, or Don’t Try to Teach a Pig to Sing — It Wastes Your Time and Annoys
the Pig.” Cloven Hoof (121) 20:3 (1987), p. 1.
(58) LaVey, “Binaric... ” p. 1.
(59) George Orwell “Politics and the English Language." hi: The George Orwell Reader ed. Richard H.
Revere (New York: Harcourt Brace and Javonovitch, 1984).
(60) LaVey, “Binaric...,” p. 1.
(61) LaVey, Satanic Bible, 1 lOCf.
(62) LaVey, “Don’t Recycle Your Brain,” , p. 1.
(63) Anton LaVey, “Untitled Editorial.” Cloven Hoof (93) 13::6 (1981), p. 1.
(64) LaVey, Satanic Bible , pp. 44-45.
(65) LaVey, Satanic Bible , p. 89.
(66) Anton LaVey, “Curses by the Dozen, or Wholesale Hexes” Cloven Hoof (88) 13:1 (1981), p. 2.
(67) LaVey, “Megarhythm,” p. 2.
(68) Anton LaVey, “The Invisible War” Cloven Hoof (116) 19:2 (1986), p. 1.
(69) Anton LaVey, “Comparisons and Equivalents....” Cloven Hoof (123) 22:1 (1988), pp. 2-4.
(70) Anton LaVey, “Give the Children a Chance.” Cloven Hoof (122) 20:4 (1987), p. 2.
(71) Anton LaVey, “Farewell Trinity and Remember Los Alamos” Cloven Hoof (122) 20:4 (1987), p.
1 .
(72) Aiden Kelly, Crafting the Art of Magic (Sl Paul, MN: Llewellyn, 1991), p. 3-4.
(73) Marquis de Sade, “Dialogue between a Priest and a Dying Man.” In: The Marquis de Sade, p. 166.
(74) LaVey, Compleat Witch, p. xii.
(75) LaVey, “The Threat of Peace,” p. 4.
(76) LaVey, “Confessions of a Closet Misogynist,” p. 4.
(77) LaVey, Compleat Witch , pp. 21ff.
(78) Barton, Secret Life, pp. 177-14.
(79) LaVey, “The Threat of Peace ” p. 1.
(80) Barton, Secret Life, 182.
(81) LaVey, “Confessions of a Closet Misogynist,” P- 4.
(82) Barton, Secret Life, p. 182.
212
(83) Geoffrey Gorer, The Life and Ideas of the Marquis de Sade (London: Owen, 1953), p. 187.
(84) Anton LaVey, “How to Become a Werewolf: The Fundamentals of Lycanthropic Metamorphosis;
the Principles of Their Application” Cloven Hoof (11) 10:1 JanJFeb. (1978), 1-4. This is reprinted in
Barton’s Secret Life pp. 253-58.
(85) LaVey, “How to Become a Werewolf” p. 2.
(86) Barton, Secret Life, p. 183.
(87) Burton Wolfe, “The Church of Satan.” In: Tracy Cabot, ed. Inside the Cubs (Los Angeles:
Holloway House, 1970), p. 223.
(88) LaVey, Satanic Bible, 110.
(89) LaVey, Satanic Bible, 111.
(90) LaVey, Satanic Bible, 121.
(91) Aquino, Church of Satan, pp. 147; 150-151; 212-213 and Appendices 69; 70; 71 and 72.
(92) The two ost important articles by LaVey on the subject of E.C1 are “Erotic Crystalizarion Inertia
(E.C.I.): Its Relationship to Longevity,” Cloven Hoof 5:1 (1973), r>. 31-38 and “ECI Relative to Memory
Retention: A Reevaluation of the Term Occulf Cloven Hoof (88) 13:1 (1981), R). 3-4.
(93) Ante® LaVey, “Untitled Editorial” Cloven Hoof (103) 15:4 (1983). p. 1.
(94) Anton LaVey, The Satanic Rituals (New York: Avon, 1972). p. 53.
(95) Barton, Secret Life, pp. 259-60 and Church of Satan, 1-9.
(16) Wright, “Sympathy for the Devil” p-106.
213
Chapter 10
Michael A. Aquino
— The Temple of Set —
I, Set, am come again to ray friends among mankind
— Let ray great nobles be brought to me.(l)
The Temple of Set is... an association of the Elect to honor Set, exalt his Gift
to ourselves, and exercise it with the greatest possible wisdom. As Set is a
metaphysical entity, apart from the objective universe, he may be described as
a “god” as conventional society employs the term- In this sense the Temple of
Set is a religion— not one which is based on irrational faith, but one which
derives its core principles from exercise of the evident Gift of its god.(2)
Rarely in this century has a man with such objectively exemplary qualities stepped into
the occult theater as Michael Aquino. In a world usually filled with marginal personalities
of Kttle accomplishment outside their “occult” field, Aquino is a remarkable exception. The
organization which he was instrumental in founding in 1975, the Temple of Set, has
assumed some of these same qualities as well.
Aquino is an initiatory product of the Church of Satan and traces his magical roots to
the teachings of Anton LaVey— although in the end, as really from the beginning, Aquino
showed unique qualities which distinguished his thought from that of LaVey. The Temple
of Set is a vital and viable organization with dozens of senior initiates around the world and
scores of local groups, called Pylons, in North America, Europe and Australia. It has been
one of Aquino's most remarkable achievements that he has fashioned an organization
which is not a “one man operation”— as such affairs nsually are. Much more than with the
Church of Satan, the shape of the Temple of Set has been influenced by a number of its
initiates over the years. At one point the Temple was even headed by someone other than
Aquino— a situation unique in the history of such organizations.
Although Aquino is a highly qualified intellectual, holding a Ph.D. in Political Science
from the University of California, and a man of numerous other accomplishments in the
objective universe— he also brings to the pursuit of the goals of the left-hand path those
more purely magical qualities characteristic of the Transcendental Branch of the path. In the
case of Anton LaVey, for all his drama and bombast, the magic he uses is mostly of a
“Lesser” kind. Aquino's practical application of what he calls Greater Black Magic returns
the technology of magic to the intellectual levels it enjoyed millennia ago.
The Saga of Ra-en-Set
The life of Michael Aquino is perhaps deceptively open and unmysterious. In sharp
contrast to the shady background of his mentor LaVey, many of whose “shadows” have
been artificially painted in as in a Caligari set, Aquino’s life has been vary public and well
documented. The mystery exists where mysteries thrive best— in the hidden interior of the
psyche.
— Influences —
Upon reading the short biography to follow the reader will be able to recognize many
“institutional” influences on the shaping of Michael Aquino’s comprehensive self— from
the Boy Scouts, to the stock market, from the Green Berets to the Church of Satan, and
from the University of California to the Academy of Magical Arts. From these and other
institutions he seems to have gleaned qualities which have found their way into the vision
of the Temple of Set
A list of thinkers and writers who helped shape his inner landscape, such as we have
for Anton LaVey, would be interesting. No such synopsis has been published, but through
a combination of analysis and conversation a partial body of such influences can be put
together.
At the top of such a list would appear the name of Anton LaVey who was Aquino’s
magical mentor, his “magical father” if you will, from 1968 to 1975— and in many ways
beyond that time. LaVey and the Church of Satan acted as a catalyst that put many
divergent elements of the still young Michael Aquino’s thoughts — existentialism, magic,
political science — into a meaningful and practical form. The influence of LaVey on
Aquino’s ideas is usually quite obvious because Aquino himself is so much aware of it
His own mammoth study of the Church of Satan is a testament to LaVey’s philosophy.
Another important “mentor” would be Aleister Crowley, whom Aquino never met of
course, but who has had a direct and profound effect on his magical and philosophical
development. Crowley’s short-comings, as seen from the Satanic and left-hand path
perspective are not glossed over, but Crowley’s contributions to the style, philosophy and
theory of “Magick” have been digested and synthesized in Aquino’s system in ways LaVey
was uninterested in doing. Aquino sometimes sees himself in the magical legacy of the
Beast, c alling himself the Second Beast of Revelation (Rev. 13:11).
Aquino’s third mentor died well over 2,000 years ago, but Ids shadow has been cast
over western thought for as many solstices— Plato. The core of Aquino’s cosmology is
solidly Platonic. In referring to the ancient Hellenic master’s ideas he follows in the magical
traditions of the Hermetics and Renaissance magicians. Most would-be magicians since the
Renaissance have, however, relied on “pie-digested” forms of Platonic thought— which
has diluted their precision. Aquino returns to the source for a fresh synthesis— he forges
an alloy with the very gold of Plato’s sun.
Other influential shapers of his thought would include a number of writers. John
Fowles wrote a novel, The Magus, which has helped shape Aquino’s philosophy and ideas
216
on initiatory development on many subtle levels. It is a book to which he often refers in his
own writings. More romantically, Aquino cites Jules Verne’s 20,000 Leagues Under the
Sea as an early model for some of his ideas and predilections. Captain Nemo is the near
perfect artificial model for the Lord of the Left-hand Path— he is isolated in a world of his
own creation (the Nautilus), yet he is free to roam and interact in a seemingly omnipotent
way with the worlds around him.
There are, of course, dozens of other thinkers and writers who have had some
influence on Aquino’s magical philosophy. He fully shares these with initiates of the
Temple of Set by means of the Temple’s extensive 24 category, nearly 300 title, annotated
reading list which is a part of the Crystal Tablet Other writers well-represented on that Hst
include P.D. Ouspensky, Friedrich Nietzsche, Eric Hoffer. H.P. Lovecraft, Thomas
Szasz, FLA. Schwaller de Lubicz and John Dee.
This reading list itself shows the breadth of Aquino’s Sedan interests. It contains topics
on ancient Egypt, Satanism, historical and contemporary works on occultism, Aleister
Crowley, the Enochian system of John Dee, Pythagoreans, sex in magic. Fascism and
magic, cybernetics, good and evil, life and death, magical geometry, parapsychology,
space exploration, as well as vampirism and lycanthropy.
The Life of the Second Beast
And 1 beheld another beast
coming up out of the earth:
and he had two horns like a lamb,
and he spake as a dragon.
(Rev. 13:11)
Michael A. Aquino was bom on 16 October 1946. His father. Michael, is a now retired
I tali an-bom investment broker and his mother, Betty Ford, was a b rillian t artist who had
studied sculpture in the studio of Georg Kolbe in Germany during the 1930s.
Of his own birth Aquino would write in a commentary to the magical text entitled The
Book of Coming Forth by Night :
Collectors of magical happenstance may take note of the following concerning
the persona of Michael Aquino: He was bom in 1946. precisely nine months
after a Working by Crowley’s California disciples to create a homunculus per
a secret instruction of Crowley’s to the IX degree of his Onto Templi
(Mentis. He was also bom dead, raising the question of the nature of the
force inhabiting his subsequently revived body. On his chest he bears the
same whorled swastika of hair bom by Crowley and Buddha, and his
eyebrows have always naturally curled upward into the horns described in the
Biblical Book of Revelation (13:11)... He has taken the name of the Prince of
Darkness as a part of himself: Ra-en-Set “He who Speaks as Set”(3)
Another, perhaps more sinister “magical happenstance,” is that Aquino’s day of birth is
the same date upon which the principal defendants at the Nuremberg tribunal were hanged.
Young Michael spent bis early years in San Francisco, but went to high school in Santa
Barbara. He was active in the Boy Scouts of America, and in 1965 was named National
Commander of the Eagle Scouts.
After high school Aquino took advantage of a number of scholarships to attend the
University of California at Santa Barbara. Although he had a nomination to West Point, he
decided the UCSB would afford him more freedom in the course of studies he wished to
pursue.
217
In June of 1968 Aquino graduated from the university with a B.A. in political science.
Shortly thereafter he was to leave for a year’s assignment at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
About a week after graduation he happened upon the premier of the film Rosemary's Baby
where he just caught a glimpse of Anton LaVey as he left the theater.
Aquino spent his tour of duty in at Fort Bragg with the 82nd Airborne Division as a
cavalry officer and then a PSYOP/Special Forces officer with the JFK Special Warfare
Center.
While on leave in San Francisco in March of 1969, he attended a lecture and working at
the Black House. Upon meeting LaVey, Aquino was struck with the man’s charm,
sincerity and most of all his engaging smile. The information he gathered on the Church
was interesting enough for him to join soon thereafter.
Back at Fort Bragg that Aquino began performing his first Satanic rituals— sometimes
with his fellow officers participating.
From the time of his joining to the time of his eventual resignation from the Church of
Satan in 1975, Aquino was in almost constant contact with Anton and Diane LaVey, as
well as with John Ferro, LaVey’s then chief lieutenant
In June of 1969 Aquino embarked on a tour of duty in Vietnam with the 6th PSYOP
Battalion in HI Corps Tactical Zone, South Vietnam. In this capacity, among other things,
he was engaged in experiments to disorient Vietcong and North Vietnamese soldiers by
nsing amplified sounds — sometimes complete with “demonic screams” — blaring from
helicopters flying over their heads.
In the Fall of that year Aquino began work on his first Satanic piece of writing, later
published in installments in the Cloven Hoof as “The Satanic Ultimatum.”(4)
Aquino was elevated to the level of Warlock 11° upon the completion of his
examinations in February of 1970.
Through his readings of Milton’s Paradise Lost Aquino felt inspired to write another
work entitled The Diabolicon. litis manuscript was created under the most difficult of
combat circumstances. Part of it was even destroyed by enemy fire at one point! For
Aquino there was something different about the way The Diabolicon was written: “As I
wrote sequential passages, I seemed to sense, rather than determine what they should
say ”(5) By the middle of March the manuscript was finished and sent off to the High
Priest LaVey quickly responded: “I received The Diabolicon safely. It is indeed a work
which will have a lasting impact It is done in an ageless manner and with complete
awareness.... [Y]ou may be assured it will assume a meaningful place in the Order.” The
High Priest used it at once in Workings held at the Black House.
Upon his return from Vietnam, on the night of the summer solstice in June of 1970,
Aquino was ordained to the Priesthood of Mendes in the Church of Satan by Anton LaVey
in a ceremony held in the ritual chamber of the Central Grotto in San Francisco.
From shortly after his ordination to 1973 Aquino was stationed at Fort Knox in
Kentucky. During that time he was deeply involved in the day to day administration of the
Church of Satan “in the field.” In those days the Church was well populated with
enthusiastic, and sometimes “wild,” characters. (The section on Satanic sects in the 1970s
in chapter 11 gives some indication of the nature their activities.)
In April of 1971 Aquino was asked by LaVey to write a new introduction to the Satanic
Bible winch was about to go into its seventh printing with Avon and about to be published
in hardback by University Books. The resulting text appeared in the seventh to eleventh
printings of the Bible.(6)
Since the release of Rosemary's Baby horror films about the Devil and Satanists were
the rage. A small company wanted to do a “Devil worship” film in Louisville, and so made
contact with Aquino, by then somewhat known in the area for his unusual religions beliefs,
to be a technical advisor. The result was that Aquino rewrote the concluding ritual sequence
and lent some of his ritual equipment to give the scene some authenticity. The final product
can be seen in The Asylum of Satan— a grade-Z horror flick with a grade-A ritual text
218
In that same month Aquino assumed the role of editor of the Cloven Hoof, which
allowed LaVey to concentrate on other matters. Michael Aquino remained the editor
Hoof until his resignation from the Church in 1975, and was responsible for the bulk of
that journal’s contents during the time between the end of 1971 and the middle of 1975. He
was J also chiefly responsible for getting the regional Conclaves together discussed m
chafer 9. recognized the special contribution Aquino was making to the Church and
to Satanic philosophy in general when he named Aquino to the IV (Magister Caverni) in a
of 1971. Along
certificate which read in part: “By the authority of Satan, and We, His Exarch on me
Terrestrial Plane..:’ This statement, among others, was clearly indicative to Aquino of
TaVev’s true attitude toward the character and essence of Satan.
As LaVey was Dreuarmg a volume to be entitled the Satanic Ruuds he asked Aquino to
SerialforStf'^ovecraftian” rituals and the “Adult Baptism” to be included
in the book. By early in 1972 Aquino was finished with the texts for the forthcoming
book. He wrot/the introductory sections as well as the rituals themselves inventing die
“YiicEothic language” in a totally artificial way after wining the English versions of the
rites S He would later recount the story of the genesis of ihese rites in the May 1977 issue of
thejoumal NyctalopsSJ) It should be noted that Aqumo did this as a service to the Church
and as a favor to his mentor, and receives no royalties for his contribution.
^ mid-1972 Aquino had finished his tour of duty in Kentucky and had moved back
into civilian life in Santa Barbara where he began to pursue graduate degrees m potaical
science and to woric as an account executive at an investment firm, pis also began a period
in which he was the chief writer of lengthy articles appearing m the Cloven Hoof, which
had been expanded from a newsletter to a bound digest formal. ,
In the of 1973 Aquino was recognized by LaVey to Magister Templi level of
IV 0 — the highest level within the Magistry and a level previously unanained by any other
“"Forfte n^K^S^o continued in his role as the ediror and chief contributor
to the Cloven Hoof, and certainly the Church official most responsible for dealing with the
oTl^ Aquino received copy from foe LaVeys to be
upcoming issue of the Cloven Hoof, The text clearly stated that degrees m Ae Church of
Satan could be awarded on the basis of financial or other types of contributions to the
Church This was immediately seen as a clear departure from LaVey s previous and
exhaustive statements on the nature of the Satanic Priesthood as he had envisroned it
previously, and as recorded in chaptt* 9 of this foey
of mistake wrote to the LaVeys, and received the curt command to pnnt the text as tney
had written it At that point, Aquino felt that the Infernal Mandate of Anton LaVey, as
SLStfHellhadbin broket? On 10 June 1975 Aquino sent a letter of resignation from
“ IV p-r”
Prince of Darkness, called upon him on the mght of the summer solstice (June 21-22}—
andhe came forth. The result of that Working of Greater Black Magic was a text
Book of riming Forth by Night. In some ways it might be seen as being similar to
Crowlev’s Book of the Law, and reference to that book is made in the Book of Coming
Forth bv Night But in fact the results of Aquino’s Working are dissimilar in style and
content to that^of Crowley. Tbe text has been the object of continual commentary by
^the SS3; Night Michael Aquino is named to foe V° as the
MaJSs offoe Word “p,Zmc^ “kLffer”). Xeper is an ancient Egyptian term, the
219
hieroglyph for which is R. It literally means “to become; to be; to come into being.”
Aquino himself summarizes the magical meaning of the Word as “...the transformation and
evolution of the Will from a human to a divine state— by deliberate, conscious, individual
force of mind ”(8) At the same time the contents of the book provide for the establishment
of the Temple of Set and the transference of the “Infernal Mandate” from the Church of
Satan to the Temple of Set
After being informed of these magical developments, about 100 members of the Church
of Satan resigned that organization to become the founding body of the Temple of Set By
October of 1975 the Temple had been incorporated as a religious institution in the State of
California.
Aquino as High Priest unlike LaVey, encouraged the widespread development of the
organization and the maximal development of individual initiates within the Temple even in
ways independent of his own ideas.
The Temple of Set grew steadily through its first five year period as Aquino worked
constantly on developing Setian philosophy and encouraging communication among Sedan
initiates. The Temple's journal. The Scroll of Set was founded and continues today as the
main forum for the exchange of Setian ideas.
During this same period between 1975 and 1980, Aquino continued a course of studies
in graduate school at the University of California at Santa Barbara which culminated in his
receiving of a Ph.D. in political science in 1980.
On the ides of March 1979 Aquino took the oath of the Ipsissimus, VT°. Synchronous
with tins event a V° member of the Temple of Set known by the magical name Anubis,
was nominated to become the High Priest of Set. This would in effect retire Aquino from
the position of head of the organization he had founded in 1975. This step is almost
unheard of in the history of “occult” organizations. Usually the leaders of such groups are
leaders precisely because they wish to gain and hold on to some kind of power, real or
imagined. With this move, Aquino objectively proved that he was different. He had
founded an organization and had seen it develop to a point where he felt comfortable
handing the reins over to another.
From the middle of 1979 to the middle of 1982 Anubis was the High Priest of the
Temple of Set Many changes were made in the style and tenor of the Temple teachings in
that time— which is to be expected when a new titular head of such a group is installed.
Most of these changes made the Temple more like other occult groups— with the same
foibles (no more no less) than s imil ar groups would have. For example, Anubis instituted a
policy by which all present Adepts would have to take a 31° exam, similar to the type
administered in the Church of Satan, in order to retain their degrees. Future Adepts would
have to take the test as well. (It should be pointed out that Scott’s book. The Magicians,
concerns activities of the Temple of Set in the time of the High Priesthood of Anubis.)
The chief contribution made by Anubis to Temple lore is his magical Word Xem, “a
state of Being,” which was supposed to connote the “perfected man,” the progressive
target(s) or aim(s) of Xeper. Some in the Temple of Set today still study the ramifications
of Xem, while others consider it apocryphal and largely irrelevant to present Temple
directions.
In May of 1982 Anubis resigned from the Temple of Set By the end of the turmoil
surrounding this resignation, the membership of the Temple was down to a mere 30-35
initiates.
After Aquino had received his Ph.D. from the UCSB his credentials allowed him to
become a lecturer and eventually adjunct professor of political science at Golden Gate
University in San Francisco from 1980 to 1986, teaching such courses as Ancient Political
Theory, Medieval and Modem Political Theory, United States Foreign Policy, Comparative
Political Systems and Dynamics of Western Culture. During this same period he resumed
active duty in the US Army and was stationed at the Presidio. This is also the period in
which he undertook his encyclopedic work on the history of the Church of Satan.
220
With the crises of 1982, Aquino was asked to resume his position as High Priest of the
Temple of Set—an office he still holds today.
The early 1980s were spent in the slow rebuilding of the Temple. In 1982, while on a
trip to Europe, Aquino visited Castle Wewelsburg, which had been the ceremonial
headquarters of Himmler’s SS. On the night of 19 October he was able to gain private
access to the ritual chamber, the Hall of the Slain, in the tower of the castle. There he
performed the now famous, or infamous, Wewelsburg Working. As a result of events of
that night the Order of the Trapezoid was remstituted as a formal order within the Temple of
Set, and Aquino became its second Grand Master (Anton LaVey being its first).
From the middle of the next year Aquino began to produce Runes, the journal of the
Order of the Trapezoid. This contained much of his magical thought for the period he edited
the journal (until 1986). J . „ r
From the latter part of 1986 to the end of 1987 Aquino was stationed in Washington,
DC where he attended the National Defence University and George Washington University
where he received a Masters of Public Admimstration-
— The Tree in the North —
In May of 1986 the ABC news magazine show 20f20 aired a segment on “Satanic
crime.” This was the first highly visible phenomenon of a growing tide of paranoia
sweeping the country concerning “Satanic cults.” In so man y ways this phenomenon was
just the latest manifestation of a tradition going back to the paranoid fantasies of the
Romans regarding the Christians and eventually the Christians regarding every one else—
especially the Jews and other “heretics.” The newly refurbished conservative/raedieval
values of the American religious right coalesced in an aTHanre with therapists and marginal
police officials to form a new inquisition or witch-hunt (See the Appendix: The Urban
Legend of Satanicisra.) ....
In all this the San Francisco police department seems to have been rather m the hot-seat
since that city was the headquarters of the two major Satanic organizations in the country—
and the police “weren’t doin’ anythin’ about it!” By October of 1986 the police had
collected a false accusation from an army chaplain against Michael Aquino and Lilith that
they had molested a child in San Francisco sometime during September or October in 1986.
Apparently they did not even check into the facts enough to discover that both Michael and
Lilith Aquino were in Washington, DC at that time! But then again, when have witch-
hunters worried about facts? ,
On the evening of 14 August, 1987 a variety of police officials descended on the
Aquinos residence in San Francisco and “raided” it— confiscating various Temple
documents, video tapes (mostly Disney productions!) and other equipment It just so
happened that the Aquinos were at home that evening, preparing for the upcoming Set Vm
Conclave in Hollywood.
This was the beginning of protracted legal dealings with the police and courts. Aquino
quickly nicknamed the whole episode ’The Tree in the North”— based on a passage in the
Tenth Part of the Word of Set which reads: ‘The threat of your destruction grows as a tree
in the north...it poisons the very air with its stench.” The final outcome was that no actual
charges were ever brought (because there was no evidence) and the police officials
involved — at least one of which had touted herself as an “expert on occult crnne” — were
eventually reprimanded for their “over-zealousness ” But that end did not come until years
of harassment and thousands of dollars in lawyers’ fees later.
But those who tended the Tree in the North for some time got what they wanted— a
stench Just the fact that Aquino had been “investigated” would be constantly used m the
media for some time to come. , r .
On another level the poHce/therapy/church-war on the Temple backfired- The publicity
generated by the accusations brought ever increasing media attention to Dr. Aquino and the
Temple of Set Some of the media even allowed something of a balanced view to emerge.
221
The ultimate result was that the Temple enjoyed a period of unprecedented growth in the
late 1980s and early 1990s.
— The Flourishing of the Temple —
In spite of the ‘Tree in the North” problems the Temple of Set flourished both
domestically and abroad. Local Pylons were established in England, Germany, Finland and
Australia— and domestically local Pylons grew from a single one functioning in Texas at
one time to thirty-five in every part of the country in 1996.
The Orders within the Temple also began to function well during this most recent
phase. In 1987 Aquino passed the Grand Mastery of the Order of the Trapezoid on to his
associate Polaris. This allowed Aquino, as High Priest, to concentrate more exclusively on
Temple-wide concerns for the next several years.
In 1990 he retired from active duty as a Lieutenant Colonel in the US Army and went
on inactive duty in the Reserve. At the same time he returned to his home in San Francisco
to manage the family estate and to devote himself more intensively to the affairs of the
Temple of Set
Among the most important developments in the Temple of Set in the ensuing years was
the proclamation of Working II in February 1993. This Working of Greater Black Magic
by the High Priest was designed to re-orient the Temple of Set toward the future without
the inherited negative baggage from the “Church of Satan days,” and to re-organize the
social bodies within the Temple to meet the Initiatory needs of the the members more
effectively. Additionally, Aquino has worked tirelessly to bring the Temple of Set into the
age of the internet and electronic communications.
On the Spring Equinox 1996, Don Webb was Recognized to the Degree of Magus with
the Word Xeper — refined as: “I have Come into Being.” Later that same year he was
appointed High Priest of Set, and Michael Aquino retired from that office for the second
time.
Michael Aquino has become a modem exemplary model for a Lord of the Transcend¬
ental Branch of the Left-Hand Path. He is in fact what so many “occult leaders” of the past
have aspired to be— an academically trained intellectual who nevertheless is capable of
inspired states of consciousness and direct communication with a paetematural entity.
Aquino has proven himself to be a talented and capable organizer and director of Temple
affairs, but what sets him apart form many would-be occult leaders of the latter half of the
20th century is the unswerving dedication to the principles according to which he directs
his Will. Here it is not a matter of seeming more than one is, but rather indeed Being even
more than one seems. This is the most royal, and the most forgotten of all arts and
sciences.
Sources for the Study of the Temple of Set
One of the main problems for those outside the Temple in coming to an understanding
of what the Temple is all about is the fact that none of its documents have (as yet) been
published in a commercial way. All of its official documents, which would be considered
as primary, are reserved for the use of its members. However, Dr. Aquino has always been
forthcoming with legitimate investigators when asked about certain Temple teachings to
provide them with copies of the primary documents for research purposes. The main
reason these documents are reserved to members only is to keep their contents flexible.
Things can be added, deleted, and updated as needed.
The Jeweled Tablets of Set
For each of the first four degrees within the Temple of Set structure there is a volume of
documents. These are collectively known as the Jeweled Tablets of Set The document all 1°
Setians receive upon entry into the Temple is the Crystal Tablet of Set. It certainly contains
all the most important texts of the Temple. The length of its contents exceeds the total of all
222
four of LaVey’s published works. Most of the contents of the Crystal Tablet are authored
by Michael Aquino. The twin cores of this document are sections entitled “Black Magic in
Theory and Practice” and “The Book of Coming Forth by Night: Analysis and
Commentary.” The first is a sober and straightforward, clearly written introduction to the
whole idea of magic and its successful working. The second contains all the inspired texts
penned by Aquino’s hand. Another part of the Crystal Tablet contains the Temple’s
extensive annotated reading list
Upon recognition to the II 0 the initiate of the Temple may acquire a copy of the Ruby
Tablet which as a m amm oth collection of documents — several hundred pages in length
and growing — written by a wide variety of initiates within the Temple.
Available to the Priesthood ouly is the Onyx Tablet which contains some of Aquino’s
ideas and reflections on the true character of Set’s Priesthood, both ancient and modem.
The Magistry has its Sapphire Tablet which is restricted to acquisition by members of
the Temple of Set holding the IV 0 .
The rationale behind restricting access to the various Tablets is not so much about
keeping “degree secrets” as it is about helping initiates remain as focused as possible on the
Work of their particular degree. It is rather like not having freshmen physics students
ponder the problems of quantum foam or chaos theory. Such exposure is simply thought to
be “dangerous” to students’ rational development, as essential problems are taken out of
sequence— which can end up jnst frustrating them.
All members of the Temple receive the journal called The Scroll of Set bimonthly. This
publication has been edited by perhaps a dozen people over its history and contains articles
written by Setians of all degrees. It is actually a forum for all Sedans to express themselves
rather than an organ for the leadership to communicate with the membership. In other
words it is not just a sounding board for the High Priest’s latest ideas, as the Cloven Hoof
had often been.
The various orders within the Temple of Set (as discussed in the section on
organization below) also have their own journals or newsletters published at different
intervals. These are often highly specialized for the Work being done within that particular
order and are not automatically made available to all members of the Temple. The most
active of these journals are Trail of the Serpent published by the Order of Leviathan,
Nightwing and The Vampyre Papers produced by the Order of the Vampyre, and Runes
generated by the Order of the Trapezoid.
The Inspired Works of Michael Aquino
Besides this voluminous body of work by many authors within the Temple of Set,
there are a number of texts which enjoy a special status in Temple teachings. These are the
works by Aquino which have had a pronounced noetic component— which seem to have
been written with the aid of something other than the mundane mind of Michael Aquino.
The first of these texts is The Diabolicon written over a three month period in the war-
zones of South Vietnam during Aquino’s early Church of Satan days. This text is in the
form of prose-poetic statements from eight demonic entities: Satan, Beelzebub, Azazel,
Abaddon, Asmodeus, Astaroth, Belial and Leviathan. In this work the Black Flame is first
cited as a metaphor for the Gift of the Prince of Darkness— the Promethean fire of divine
consciousness. The Diabolicon is, of course, in the “Satanic idiom,” yet in it the Platonic
directions of Aquino’s train of thought are already becoming clear. The text of The
Diabolicon was retained unreleased by Anton LaVey. It only found distribution within the
Temple of Set in 1976.
Over a two-month period in the summer of 1974, still in his Church of Satan days,
Aquino undertook a Working similar to that of The Diabolicon . The result is what came to
be called ‘The Ninth Solstice Message”— which is addressed to Anton LaVey. On one
level it is a panegyric to LaVey, but on another it presages an upheaval in the order of the
Church of Satan and contains apocalyptic undertones:
223
My Age has begun, and I am come forth to uphold my boud with mankind.
Yet I shall not illuminate all, uor even many— but a few. I seek the Elect,
who in turn seek me. Man the god shall arise only from the ashes of man the
beast — The blood is the life.
Let the institutions of the Church of Satan be discarded. Their time has
passed. Their time is past, and they have served my purposes honorably.
Seek now the Elect, as the darkness draws near. No longer shall all who
approach my Church find welcome — They shall grasp at empty air. Only the
Elect shall find what they seek.
In retrospect this text prefigures the demise of the Church of Satan as it had been in the
early years of its existence and the establishment of the Temple of Set
Another inspired text referred to directly in the Book of Coming Forth by Night is the
Word of Set. This is the body of evocatory magical texts used by the Elizabethan magician
Dr. John Dee, otherwise known as die Enochian Keys. After extensive magical work with
the Enochian Keys, as used by LaVey and others, Aquino determined that it was
impossible to treat the texts as being written in a cipher code or as an artificial language.
Over a period of several years he magically Worked on English “translations” these texts.
He finished this undertaking on 13 April 1981— an anniversary of Dee’s initial Enochian
Working. (9)
Finally, and most importantly, there is the Book of Coming Forth by Night. The book
itself is no more than about 1,500 words in length. The chief functions of the book are to
transfer the Infernal Mandate, and to introduce the magical principle of Xeper upon which
the new Temple of Set was to be founded. In the text, written over a two-hour period on
the night of 21-22 June 1975, an entity identifying itself as Set speaks directly to Michael
A. Aquino. In the words of the text many, if uot all, of the basic cosmological and
theological precepts of the Temple of Set are expressed.
The Book of Coming Forth by Night is not thought of as “holy writ” by Aquino
himself— not as die Christian thinks of his Bible, or as the typical Thelemite thinks of
Liber AL. His own assessment is that it is the result of a Working of Greater Black
Magic— the effectiveness of which can be judged by the results it demonstrates.
At this point it should be noted that in general such Workings are the prerogative of
initiates who have attained to the level of the Magistry — as an objective fact regardless of
their organizational affiliation or lack of same. Such “revelations” through a mind less well-
trained and disciplined are doubtful in the extreme.
Secondary Sources on the Temple
No systematic studies of the Temple of Set have beeu produced. Perhaps because of its
relative secrecy (as compared to the exposure of the early Church of Satan or cable TV
witches) and its rightiy perceived intellectual seriousness, the Temple of Set has daunted
most would-be investigators.
Gini Graham Scon’s supposed sociological study. The Magicians , obscures the name
of the Temple in typical sociological style by calling it the “Church of Hu” and making up
names for die various persons she encountered while working “under cover.” This virtually
negates its value as a historical document It must be noted that the less than flattering
picture she tries to paint of the Temple is one based on observations within the time Anubis
was High Priest
But beyond that fact Scott’s method is fatally flawed because she, as an admittedly
unsympathetic observer, was actually hermeneutically incapable of understanding the real
meaning of what was happening around her. She could only observe things from the
outside and so any and all of her prejudices were neady confirmed. This is why the Temple
of Set has maintained the rule that no outsiders be allowed to view actual ceremonial
224
Workings— the image of what seems to be happening and the reality of what is actually
happening are often two different things. Those who see only images understand nothing.
More usually unsystematic treatmeuts of the Temple appear in books which attempt to
cover the “Satanic scene” in some complete way. Perhaps because the Temple of Set’s
ideology is not widely available, it appears that it has been left opeu to widespread and
obviously consciously contrived misrepresentation.
Two glaring examples of this misrepresentation are found inJ.B. Russell’s Mephist-
opheles and Arthur Lyons’ Satan Wants You .
Russell, who is a professor of religion at the University of California at Santa Barbara,
and a self-confessed apologist for the Roman Catholic Church, had for some time had
contact with members of the Temple of Set Some had attended his lectures and even given
guest presentations in his classes. He had ready access to Temple material, such as the
General Information Letter. Yet with this and much more information at his disposal, he
chose to write in his book:
...A distinction should be made among "Satanic" groups. Some are merely
frivolous, like the so-called Temple of Set with its breathless hedonism in
occult trappings...
Anton Szandor LaVey founded his Church of Satan in 1966; in 1975 a
schism produced the Temple of Set Their Satanic Bible (sic) is a melange of
hedonistic maxims and misinformed [!] occultism. Like most groups,
LaVey’s claims ancient origins; it pretends to arise from the cult of Set (Seth)
in ancient Egypt (sic) For modem Sethi a ns. [sic] the Devil is no fallen angel
but a hidden force in nature...
I reproduce so much obvious misinformation here simply to show the lengths to which
even (?) an ivory tower scholar is willing to go to create a false impression of the realities
of the left-hand path. Of course, with this passage it is clear that Russell is both confused
on the facts as well as willful in his misrepresentation of the character of Temple
teachings— Set as a “force in nature”! All of which only casts doubt on the usefulness of
all his other books. Faced with these facts, it makes me wonder just who is the true
representative of “radical evil” he is so fond of invoking. As we saw in chapter 7, it is not
Satan (or Wotan!) who is responsible for the horrors of the Nazi hdocanst. If any “god” is
to be held accountable it must be that of the Roman Catholics and Lutherans— the only
“god” with motive, opportunity and methods to commit the crime. Any other conclusion is
simply criminologically untenable.
In the case of Arthur Lyons’ book disinformation about the Temple of Set seems to
have been spread by Lyons acting as an agent for his friend and mentor Anton LaVey. His
discussion is inaccurate on almost every count No one can be that misinformed or
confused— not even a journalist! The agenda here was simply to make it appear that the
Temple was disintegrating, when in fact it was growing laser than it ever had before.
A more direct presentation of the Temple’s philosophy is reflected in Larry Kahaner’s
Cults that Kill (1988). Although Mr. Kahaner had access to no more of the Temple material
than any of the other would-be investigators, he made more objective and direct use of it.
He allows the Temple documents to speak for themselves, and form a contrast with the
nonsense being spouted by hysterical “experts” as well as with other would-be “Satanists ”
Nevill Druiy’s The Occult Experience (1989), which is a book based on his research
for the documentary film of the same name, contains a few well-balanced pages on the
Temple of Set At least Drury demonstrates that he understood the basic message of Aquino
and the Temple of Set He writes: “Their quest for self-bood and individual growth is
undoubtedly a mature spiritual approach which takes man beyond mental crutches and the
restrictions of dogma directly into the dark infinity of space...”(10) He goes on to
conclude: “Aquino himself is complex, intellectual and self-assured— convinced, in fact
225
that his particular type of magical exploration goes beyond the scope of orthodox mysticism
and religion. In this respect, he may well be right”( 11)
Such objective treatments have been rare in the past decade. The only plausible reason
that the Temple of Set has been left open to so many attempts to misrepresent its true
character is that it has not chosen to place before the public an official and generally
available statement of that character. In such an environment unprincipled “professors" and
journalists seem to feel freer to make up what they want to say about die subject
The Organizational P rinciples of the Temple.
The true magical authority for the establishment of the Temple of Set is considered to be
derived from the mandate given by the Prince of Darkness in the Book of Coming Forth by
Night. The Temple itself, the collective body of individual initiates (each thought to be a
Temple of Set in his or her own right), is a magical body, but to function effectively in this
world the soul needs a body. That body is the corporation called “The Temple of Set, Inc."
In the weeks and months after the magical formation of the Temple of Set in 1975, the
founders set about creating a fully functioning legal corporation under the laws of the State
of California. It was felt that the “one man rule” of Anton LaVey had been inappropriate for
an association of true Black Magicians. The bylaws of the Temple of Set would, for
example, provide for the expulsiou of the High Priest by a vote of the Council of Nine
should he betray the trust of the Temple.
As a fully operational non-profit corporation the Temple of Set is governed by the High
Priest, the Chairman of the Council of Nine along with a voting body of nine councilors,
and an Executive Director.
The Temple of Set is the only legally recognized Satanic “church” in the United States.
It enjoys full IRS tax exemption as any other “church” would. No one is making any
money from the activities of the Temple. In fact, its leaders often spend their own personal
funds to finance publications of the Temple or its Orders.
As made clear in the General Information letter of the Temple can only accept those
over 18 years of age as Initiates. The main reason for this is that before that age most are
unable to grasp the intellectual content of the Temple of Set philosophy. Temple members
generally think that children before that age should be educated secularly and exposed to
religion in a theoretical way only. The part of them, the psyche, is not yet mature enough to
be qualified to particpate in Sedan philosophy or W orkings of Greater Black Magic.
The Degree System of the Temple of Set
An initiatory grade system is seen as a tool in the philosophy of the Temple of Set The
criteria for Recognition to the various levels or degrees are clearly defined on one level, yet
remain flexible enough that each member of the Priesthood or Magistry responsible for
makin g Recognitions can develop his or her own personal criteria and philosophy about
them. In the Temple of Set initiates are not "initiated" by the Temple or by other members,
nor are they “elevated” by means of the authority of those “above” them in the system.
Rather it is a matter of potential initiates being given a map and some structural guidelines
on how to travel with this map— the magical theories of the Temple and its initiatory
system. Potential initiates then travel — Become — and communicate the results of their
Becoming to members of the Priesthood.
As a result of the observation of objective changes occurring in initiate in accordance
with their Wills, and in accordance with die road-map provided by the theoretical degrees, a
member of the Priesthood or Magistry is able to Recognize the transition form one initiatory
state of being to another. It is then the purpose of the institution which is the Temple to
certify this Recognition— and make it more objective fact. No ritual can make one become
an Adept, Priest or Master— this Work must be undertaken on one’s own and in one’s
own unique way. What the Temple does is Recognize these transitions and states of being.
226
The Setian degree system is based directly on that of the Church of Satan, and
indirectly on that of Crowley’s A.-.A.*, and the G.-.D.-. There are six degrees, each with
its special purpose and character:
The Setian (1°) is somewhat of a probationer m the Temple. If one applies to the Temple
and is accepted — and most are accepted unless their applications display gross
misunderstandings of Setian philosophy or indicate the clear unsuitability of the individual
to Temple work — there is a two year period before the end of which the individual must
have been Recognized to the n 0 . If this has not happened, the individual will be dropped
form the Temple roster. The Setian will receive the Crystal Tablet of Set and will have
access to other sources and resources within the Temple. There is no established Temple
doctrine or ri tual the Setian must learn in order to “advance " The progress and the direction
of that progress is entirely up to the individual. The Setian is distinguished by a silver
Pentagram of Set on a white background.
The Adept (11°) is one who has been Recognized by a member of the Priesthood (HI 0
and above) as having mastered some forms of magic, as being well-versed in the principles
of Setian philosophy, and as being a sane and reliable person who will be an asset to him-
or herself as well as to the Temple. Once the Adept has beat Recognized to the H° he or she
may remain as a permanent member of the Temple with no further official obligations to the
Temple. The Adept is free to explore infinitely the depth and breadth of Black Magic. To
aid the Adept magician in this, there is the Ruby Tablet of Set which may now be obtained
form the Temple. The Adept is distinguished by a silver Pentagram of Set on a red
background.
The Priest/Priestess (in 0 ) crosses a threshold of existence— it is a non-natural event
that an Adept Comes into Being as a Priest of Set Such an occurrence can only be
Recognized by members of the Magistry of the Temple (IV C and above). Although different
Masters of the Temple may observe different criteria for Recognizing the IH 0 status of an
individual, what seems to hold them all together is the idea that the Black Flame — the
direct and pure essence of the Prince of Darkness — has been made manifest in their
beings, in their essences. This manifestation will, of necessity, lead to certain objective and
tangible results in the behavior, life and Work of the nascent Priest or Priestess.
In the m° there begins the transition from a human state to a divine one:
...Priesthood involves the opening of a very special kind of doon the merging
of the consciousness, indeed the personality, with that of the Prince of
Darkness himself. In this Working the Priest or Priestess in no sense loses
personal identity or Self-awareness; rather one’s consciousness is augmented,
energized, and strengthened by that of Set. (T[he Priest or Priestess... is
something more than human, something more than the individual whose
human visage appears before onlookers. [H]e or she is not “possessed,” but
is rather become a veritable living Temple indwelled by the presence of
Set.(12)
It only takes one Master to Recognize a member of the HF, but this Recognition must
also be corroborated by two other members of the Magistry to make it official. The Priest
or Priestess is distinguished by a silver Pentagram of Set on a black background.
Beyond the Priesthood it becomes difficult to speak in this format directly of the criteria
for Recognition. Aquino writes in the Crystal Tablet.
As the Priesthood constitutes a merging of the individual soul with that of
Set, so the Magistry constitutes an expansion of that merger to a full
apprehension of the Aeon of Set The Master knows not only the
consciousness of Set, but the reach of that consciousness and the resultant
view of creation and existence it embraces. All particular phenomena are
227
evaluated, placed and balanced within the continuum of the Aeon by the
Master, and such adjustments in events as the Master makes are for Aeonic
purposes... [TJhe IV 0 is neither just an administrative promotion nor a reward
for distinguished service; it is an initiatory state of being in itself.(l3)
Aquino, from a left-hand path perspective, rejects Crowley’s hypothesis that upon
attaining the grade of Magister Temple fee initiate would undergo an “annihilation of the
personality” and “absorption in the Universal consciousness.”
In the Temple a Master can only be Recognized upon the nomination of the High Priest
and confirmation by a majority vote by the Council of Nine. The Magister or Magistra is
distinguished by a silver Pentagram of Set against a royal blue background.
The degree of Magus (V°) has only been attained by a handful of initiates in the Church
of Satan/Temple of Set tradition. A Magus is a Master of the Temple who has stepped
outside the totality of the Aeonic current to alter or modify it in an evolutionary way— this
is done by means of a Working Formula, a Word. Theoretically, this could inaugurate a
new Aeon, or improve or strengthen the existing oue. In any case, the changes will be ones
counter to preexisting values and will therefore be met with resistance. The implementation
of the changes is spoken of as the Task of the Magus, that the Work must proceed against
prevailing inertia is the Curse of the Magus.
In the Temple a Magus can only be Recognized upon the nomination of the High Priest
and confirmation by a unanimous vote by the Council of Nine. The Magus is distinguished
by a silver Pentagram of Set against a purple background.
The Ipsissimus (VI 0 ) — a Latin word which means “his very utmost self’ — can be
described as a “successful Magus”— one whose Task has been completed.
Inherent in such completion is a unique perception of the new Aeonic inertia
which has resulted, placing the Ipsissimus at once within and without the
Aeon itself. To function as a Ipsissimus he must work to perfect and
harmonize not only the created or modified Aeon, but also its entire
relationship with preexisting and potential Aeons.(14)
The Magus is best suited to determine for himself when he is ready to take the Oath of
the Ipsissimus and be Recognized to that grade. Initiates of that grade are distinguished by
a silver Pentagram of Set against a gold background.
In practice this system seems to have worked more or less effectively over the years. It
is not yet perfect As with everything else truly conscious, it is evolving. What is perhaps
most remarkable about it is the level of responsibility “delegated” to the 111° Priesthood and
to the Magistry for the Recognition of Adepts and members of the Priesthood respectively.
There are few “hangers-on” in the Temple. The two year time limit on the 1° is one that
is enforced. Extensions have been known to be granted, but they must be warranted. As
there is no set curriculum in die Temple, Recognition must of necessity be based on
individual work and initiative. In order to be aware of work of this kind members of the
Priesthood must have the time and energy to interact with individual Setians. An unlimited
number of 1° members of the Temple tfould soon overburden the system.
One of the most effective tools of Sedan initiation are the Pylons. These are local
groups of Setians, usually led by a member of die Priesthood, who interact with one
another both formally and informally and occasionally hold group Workings. The leader of
the Pylon is called a Sentinel, who may also be a senior Adept sponsored by a member of
the Magistry.
It is clear that the Temple of Set, with its system of degrees, is a tool for initiation, not
an organization which tries to recruit and retain as many members on its rolls as possible.
228
Orders within the Temple of Set
A prerogative of the grade of Magister Templi, Crowley had earlier pointed out that
they could form their own orders in harmony with the prevailing Aeonic current In this
spirit, Aquino urged the IV° initiates of the Temple to form their own orders. These were
presented at the Set V International Conclave held in Santa Cruz, California in 1984.
Space prevents me from discussing all of the Orders within the Temple of Set, but as
their functioning is an important part of the over all workings of the Temple of Set, they
must be mentioned only briefly.
The Orders are for the most part expressions of the personal Works of the Magister or
Magistra Templi who is the Order’s Grand Master. The presence of the order system
provides for a potentially infinite number of Working environments for individual Initiates
in the Temple. As a general policy Sedans my only join an order after they have been
Recognized to the degree of Adept. This would indicate that their general Work in the
Temple is at least nominally finished, and that they are ready to specialize in some area of
magical study within the Orders.
The Order of the Trapezoid officially enjoys no special status, yet has such by virtue of
its heritage and destiny. The order was reconstituted as a part of the Temple of Set by
Michael Aquino during his now famous Wewelsburg Working, held in the Castle
Wewelsburg in Westphalia, Germany in 1982. Prior to that time it had been a designation
for the Council of Nine both within the Church of Satan and the Temple of Set But with
the Wewelsburg Working the order embarked on its own true mission: The Quest for the
Grail of Life.
The Order of the Vampyre holds a spacial interest among Romantic Sedans: Fans of the
Bram Stoker novel will remember that Count Dracula did not become a vampire is the
“usual” way— it was as a result of his initiation into a Satanic sect— or as Stoker put it:
“dealings with the Evil One,” and “learning his secrets in the Schok>mance.”( 15)
The Order of Leviathan took as its original guiding principle the first part of the
“Statement of Leviathan” in The Diabolicon , which reads: “Before God or Angel, Daimon
or man, there was Leviathan alone, principle of continuity and
ageless existence. By relation and time I have oft been sought, but Leviathan shall yield to
none other than the final master of the Universe.”(16)
The Order of the Sepulcher of the Obsidian Masque concentrates on the performance of
the Dromenon 'or psychosomatic/ritual theater productions through which the Initiate
manifests a process which can be effected through symbolic death/life initiatory experience.
Other orders in the Temple of Set, as of 1997, were: The Order of Amn, the Order of
Anpu, the Order of Homs, the Order of Kronos, the Order of Merlin, the Order of
Nepthys,the Order of Nietzsche, the Order of the Python, the Order of Setne Kamuast, the
Order of Shuti, and die Order of Xepera.
— The Black Magical Universe —
Sedan Cosmology
Individual Setian thought begins with logical suppositions and proceeds from them to
more magical conclusions based on experience. Aquino states that the world views of other
religions have perhaps been “aesthetically and/or emotionally attractive” to many in the
past, but that “does not make any one of them true— merely popular.” It is one of
Aquino’s essential operating principles that the Setian solution to fundamental problems of
cosmology, theology, anthropology and magic is the only correct one— “after having
considered and dismissed the alternatives as untrue in whole or in part.”(17) The Setian
cosmology is posited as the best possible answer to fundamental philosophical and magical
questions given the data available— it remains, however, open to evolution should any
fallacy be identified or further data become known.
The applicatiou of Ockham’s razor is one of the great principles of Setian philosophy—
“what can be explained by assuming fewer things should not be explained by assuming
229
more ” Too often students in magical schools of thought are off trying to scale “Jacob’s
Ladder” before they even know how to walk. The science of Sedan Initiation tries to avoid
this situation.
The first assumption is that there exists a Universe, defined as “the totality of existence,
both known and unknown by humanity.”(18) Within this internally consistent framework
exists the objective universe, which is defined as “the vast expanses of space and the
masses of animate and inanimate matter and energy occupying iL”(19) This latter concept is
what humans perceive as t4 the (natural) universe,” and its laws are the “laws of nature.”
Beyond this there exists the subjective universe — the psyche distinguished from the
objective universe — which is “both apprehensive (reaching beyond the limits of the
objective universe) and creative (enabling one to generate meaning, to initiate
existence) .”(20) More will be said on this component in the sections below. These are the
three assumptions needed to act as building blocks for the Black Magical theory of the
Universe.
The Hisrp.m in g student of the history of ideas will see the influence of the cosmology of
both Pythagoras and Plato on those of Aquino in many areas. It should be pointed out too
that Aquino believes many of the ideas of Pythagoras and Plato have been derived, directly
or indirectly, from those of Egypt
The clearest, simplest and yet most profound symbol of the Sedan cosmology is
provided by the Pentagram of Set. Aquino discusses this symbol iu Appendix 1 of the
Crystal Tablet . The perfect circle (which is a mathematical function of pi) around the
pentagram represents the “mathematical order of the objective universe.” While the
pentagram itself can be seen as representing the consciousness and ratiouality inherent in
the subjective universe. Its points do not touch the circle “signifying that the Powers of
Darkness are not derived from or dependent upon” the natural order. The pentagram is
shown with two points upward ‘*10 imply change and movement in place of stasis and rest,
and also to proclaim the evolutionary dialectic of thesis combined with antithesis to produce
synthesis— instead of a foreordained and unavoidable absolute standard.”
It should also be noted that ancient Pythagorean depictions of the pentagram showed it
most often in the so-called “inverse” position. This was because it was originally seen not
as a “star” but as a geometrical figure resulting from the extension of the lines of a perfect
pentagon.
In this cosmology it will be noted there is an inherent “dualism” between nature and
“non-nature” which echoes the ancient Greek distinction between physis (nature) and
psyche (intellect). This is not the hostile dualism of the Gnostics, but is rather more based
on the fundamental existentialist distinction between self and not-self.
This distinction is also projected into the Universe as a whole, positing that the
objective universe and the subjective universe(s) exist in reality, although we, as human
beings may indeed be unable to perceive the objective universe directly— without the
medium of the subjective universe.
One thing that is striking about Setian philosophy, beginning with its cosmology, is
that one does not have to resort immediately to an “arcane” vocabulary (of the Kabbalah,
Magick, Alchemy, etc) to understand its premises. The Setian can discuss his philosophy
with secular philosophers and be perfectly comfortable, if he so wishes. The more arcane
concepts are reserved for when they are more rightly used— at the highest levels of magical
Work.
Basic Setian cosmology provides a theoretical framework sufficient for basic and
essential Black Magical initiatory work— further complications or elaborations are the
work of individuals of Orders with some specific need for them.
Also essential to the Setian view of cosmic order is the ancient theory of Aeons. Some
of this is drawn from the work of Aleister Crowley on the subject, but other ideas have also
gravitated toward the Setian philosophy of Aeons as well. The Book of Coming Forth by
Night clearly establishes the idea that the year 1966 was the beginning of a New Aeon—
230
which superseded that which began in 1904 at Crowley's Cairo Working which resulted in
the Book of the Law. The Age of Satan lasted only ten years, as an inaugural period
leading to the full establishment of the Aeon of Set In purely Sedan terms the Age of Satan
(1966-1975) was the time of Set-HarWer, when Set and his “Opposite Self’ could not be
seen as fully articulated from one another. HarWer is Horus of the Crowleyan system. (See
below.)
So on one level the Sedan theory of Aeous is in full accord with Crowley’s linear
model. But on another level, and based on more research on the tradition of Aeons as used
in ancient Hellenistic philosophy, the Setian view becomes less linear, and more
“synchronous.” The Aeous exist beyond time as we know it and so do not unfold in a
linear fashion like a story book. But that is the way we usually perceive them in the
objective universe.
— Behold the Majesty of Set —
Setian Theology
The topic of Setian theology is again a relatively streamlired one— nothing is posited
which is not necessary but everything responsible for the phenomenon in question is
accounted for. Theology is seen to coalesce with cosmology in the Setian system in that to
apprehend in any accurate way the true character of the god Set, or any other supposed
“god” one ultimately must be able to apprehend the impersonal first forms — or Principles
— upon which all such constructs are dependent The Temple of Set is not a neo-Egyptian
religion attempting to revive the cultic forms of the ancient worship of the Khemite deity
called Set
In Khem I remain no longer, for I am forgotten
there, and my house at PaMat-et is dusL(21)
But this form of the entity in question is undoubtedly the oldest such historical image. (See
chapter 3.)
The image of the god Set in ancient Egyptian iconography is that of an unknown
(perhaps “imaginary”) animal. In this he is unique. All other god-forms, if they have
zoomorphic attributes, have ones of well-known animals— the hawk, the hippopotamus,
the ibis, the jackal, and so on. But the so-called Set-animal is otherwise unknown. This
leads us to conclude that perhaps it is a creation of the very faculty which that god gives to
mankind— tile power to create forms and apprehend that which lies beyond the natural
uni verse
In the Book of Coming Forth by Night Set states:
I am the ageless Intelligence of this Universe. I created HarWer [Horns] that I
might define my Self. All other gods of all other times and nations have been
created by men. This you know... from my manifest semblance, which alone
is not of Earth.
Here it becomes clear that Set is Intelligence, de-fined, made finite and given shape, by
the objective universe (= HarWer) which it created to provide that shape and definition.
Aquino himself comments on this passage:
The Universe as a whole is mechanically consistent, but it does not possess a
“God” personality that favors one of its components— such as mankind —
above others. The Set-entity, however, is finite intelligence within the
Universe and can draw such distinctions. Set is a being operating in disregard
of the order of the Universe, not in enforced concert with it(22)
231
The image of the principle, first form, of intelligence surrounded by a sea of darkness
is the underlying esoteric rationale behind the title “Prince of Darkness”
Aquino also holds that historically the name “Satan” was ultimately derived from a
special honorific title of Set: Set-hen, which in Egyptian means “the Majesty of Set”(23)
An important and profound difference exists between Aquino’s understanding of Set
and LaVey’s conception of Satan. In many ways this difference is the same as that between
the Transcendental and Immanent Branches of the Left-hand Path. As Aquino pointed out
in early Temple of Set writings(24) in “conventional Satanism” (i.e. that of LaVey and
others) there exists a “Satanic paradox” which arises from the conception of Satan as “a
force of nature.” Satan is somehow derived from or dependent upon God/Nature for his
existence, and so remains ultimately subordinate to him/her. The Setian philosophy
liberates the Prince of Darkness from those particular constraints by observing that
intelligence is something apart and separate from the mechanical and organic laws of the
Universe.
It will be recalled from chapter 3 that in the ancient Middle Eastern tradition reflected in
the Book of Genesis demonic forces were seen to have two aspects— one carnal (hence
orthodoxy’s abhorrence of the physical) and one intellectual (the Forbidden Fruit). In the
esoteric tradition this Fruit is symbolized as a “Dark Fire in the West,” derived from a
reading of I Enoch (23). (25)
It must be said that within the Temple of Set, even at the senior levels of initiation, there
is a variety of views on the character of the Set-entity, some do in fact seem to see him as
the ancient Egyptian god-form who has survived and been Remanifested in the Temple.
Others may see him as a personal god-form, who takes some interest on a regular basis in
the affairs of his Temple. While some see the image of Set as a convenient symbol for the
Self, useful in the formulation of magical Workings and for philosophical purposes.
Ultimately, however, the view of Set as the first form of the Self— the principle of isolate
intelligence seems the simplest and most direct apprehension of the entity. Set in this sense,
is ontologically real. If we know we are because we think, i.e. are self-aware, there must
necessarily be a first form of intelligence from which each of our individual “intelligences”
is derived. Set is the general Principle, the individual psyche of a member of the Elect is the
specific manifestation.
The left-hand path is the path of separation, of non-union. The first model necessary
for this formulation is that of a separate entity which is distinguished from all that
surrounds it Without this man is without awareness— even of his “animal-ness” as Anton
LaVey or others of the Immanent Branch of the path would have it.
In the passage of the Book of Coming Forth by Night cited just above HarWer is
mentioned as the entity by which, or against which, the Set-entity defines itself as an act of
its own Will. Originally in Egyptian theology, the gods Horns and Set were one entity: the
Hrwyfy— “the one with two faces.” Here Set declares that the separation was a Willful act
of Self-definition. The separate HarWer-entity is one which retains some of the self-
awareness of the Set-entity, but which is equally a part of the objective universe. This
conflicted nature makes HarWer — the Opposite Self of Set — “a strange and fitful
presence ” whose words are “tinged with... inconsistency and irrationality.”(26)
The HarWer-entity is supposedly that which dictated the Book of the Law to Aleister
Crowley in 1904. (See chapter 8.) It is for this reasou that Crowley’s book is so full of
apparent inconsistencies and emotionalism.
The “separation process” between Set and HarWer, described here as being internal to
the Set-HarWer entity, is the theological or cosmological equivalent of the rebellion of the
angels in heaven in the Judeo-Christian system. The implications are, of course, also quite
different In the Setian view the “conflict” is implicit and a matter of essence, not explicit
and a matter of “morality.”
232
The same passage in the Book of Coming Forth by Night cited above stales that “other
gods” have been created by humanity, or actually by the principle of isolate intelligence
incarnate in humanity. Aquino comments on this by saying:
[0]ther gods, whether Egyptian or foreign, are derivative of Set or of the
human mind. (This does not imply they ate “imaginary” in the vulgar sense.
The mind is capable of substantive creation; it can give life to stereotypical,
archetypical or unique gods or daemons. (27)
This has the net effect of elevating humans to the level of continuing co-creators with Set—
which is consistent with the ancient view of humanity, revived in the western Renaissance.
Although the theology and cosmology of the Temple of Set are extremely important
because they provide the road map for initiatory Work, it is in the human psyche, in the
individual or microcosmic manifestation of these macrocosnric and theological principles,
where the real Work begins and ends. Ultimately, the Temple of Set does not constitute a
theocentric religion, but rather a psychecentric one. This is in the great tradition of the
daimon-centered systems of ancient Greece or the/y/g/a-cemered ones of the eldritch north.
— The Children of Set —
Sedan Anthropology
Sedan philosophy is a psychecentric one— that is, it focuses the attention of the subject
(actor) of any act of Will back upon the subject or one doing the action. The structure of
this subject is called, among other names, the psyche, intellect. souL ba (in Egyptian), and
so on. Aquino prefers not to split hairs on the analysis of this structure at this stage.
Initially it is sufficient for general purposes to realize the distinction between the pan of
man which partakes of the objective universe and is ultimately subject to its internally
consistent mechanical and organic laws, and which part constitutes a subjective universe
not necessarily constrained by Universal laws. This realization must come first It must
then be exercised in the form of acts of Will— or magic.
The Black Flame
The human being is seen as possessing a non-natural component the psyche, which is
logically of non-natural origin. Consciousness, it is logical to assume, did not arise from
non-consciousness. Aquino also objects to Darwinian theory which have the species evolve
slowly over a period of several milli on years. His objection to this is largely on the grounds
that it cannot reasonably account for the rapid development of consciousness in the
species.(28) This non-uatural component is referred to as the “Gift of Set” Previously in
the Diabolicon Aquino had identified it as the Gift of Satan/Lucifer. The pure essence of
this Gift and the means by which it was given to human beings, is called the Black Flame.
This formula was also first mentioned in the Diabolicon transcribed by Michael Aquino
during the initial phase of his Church of Satan career. This Aquino-inspired phrase was
even later used as a title of a Church of Satan journal.
The Elect of the Temple of Set
In technical Setian terms the “Elect” refers specifically to initiates in the Temple of Set
of then 0 and above. (29) However, in more general terms this can refer to those who have
realized their separateness from the Universal order— and who have thus been selected out
by the Prince of Darkness. It is as a tool or instrument for this process that the Temple of
Set exists
The concept of elitism in the Temple of Set was to some extent inherited from the
Church of Satan. But Aquino’s philosophy has refined the concept further and made it
more objective. The very idea of elitism is an antinomian one in our current political
climate, in the US at least Everyone is supposed to be created equal— which is a patently
absurd notion.
233
In the Temple of Set the initiate can learn to function in an environment which is at least
to some extent an artificially elite one (in the sense that it is created by the subjective
universe). Through this experience the initiate can learn how to function more objectively in
the “World of Horrors”— or the non-initiated outside the Temple. True elitism can be
recognized, and the lack of it seen clearly wherever its lack is apparent Such recognitions
are essential to objective work in the world.
The Temple of Set is not an ersatz society for misfits the way so many “occult
societies,” orders, covens, and so on, are for those who gravitate toward them. The degree
system, often criticized by LaVey and others for rewarding behavior within the institution
while ignoring “worldly accomptishments,” is not an end in itself but a magical instrument
or tool. The instrument is then to be used, as initiates Will, in “worldly accomplishments,”
or any other accomplishments desired.
One of the most often heard metaphors for the Temple of Set’s degree system is the
university degree system. Indeed a Ph.D. does not make someone a great scholar in the
objective sense, it is merely recognition by a group of qualified individuals that the person
in question has the “equipment” to become a great scholar in the objective sense. This does
not invalidate or negate the authority of universities to grant such degrees but it does put
that authority in perspective objectively.
It is not the purpose of this book to sink to the level of a “sociological study” — but I
will note the following from the perspective of one who knows — that the senior initiates
of the Temple of Set are almost without exception persons of significant “worldly
accomplishments.” This is not because there is a direct link between “advancement” in the
degree system and such accomplishments, but rather because those who have worked with
the instrument correctly have been able to use it according to their own Wills to create the
s it u a ti ons in life they desire.
The Grail of Life beyond Death
The question of the possibility for immortality is a central one in the magical Setian
philosophy of Michael Aquino. His work in this area also goes back to his days in the old
Church of Satan. In a 1973 issue of the Cloven Hoof he wrote an article entitled “The
Secrets of Life and Death,” which used as a starting point Alan Harrington s book The
Immortalist. There the trail ended with Harrington’s technological answer involving
cryonics.(30)
This article was followed up a decade later in a contribution to Runes , the journal of the
Order of the Trapezoid, entitled “The Secrets of Life and Death: Part IL” In this article
Aquino comments:
The “scientific” argument for the authenticity of the Book of Coming Forth by
Night hinges upon the notion that the consciousness is conceptually a
violation of nature. The Wewelsburg Working goes one step further and
asserts that life is conceptually contrary to nature. At first this assertion seems
outrageous; after all there is quite a bit of life going on “in nature” as we see it
on Earth. But have we found evidence of any life anywhere else? We have
not; and the odds against life (as we understand it) evolving in any given part
of the cosmos are billions and billions to one. Even on Earth, life is a delicate,
temporary phenomenon which will cease altogether in another 500 million
years.(31)
He further remarks that our own bodies have a rapid rate of cell-death, and that our
physical vehicles are replaced many times over in our “natural” life-spans. This and, other
factors, lead him to conclude that life, like consciousness, is not in fact dependent on the
physical body. This liberates the rational Black Magician to seek immortality according
non-natural technologies.
234
This interest in the continuance of self-awareness after death is shared by all schools of
the left-hand path. One entire reading list category in the Crystal Tablet is dedicated to this
topic. However, within the Temple there is no dogmatic belief or conclusion about the
means of attaining, or the character of, any post mortem state.
Besides the Order of the Trapezoid, several Orders within the Temple, including those
of the Vampyre and Leviathan, have as central features the quest for the continuance of
self-awareness— or immortality.
Aquino’s philosophy is largely consistent at the level of verbal discussion on the
question of immortality. LaVey claims that “man is just another anim al” (a statement with
its own logical problems) and entirely natural or carnal. But then when he speaks of
immortality words such as “shell” are ascribed to the body, which clearly implies
something other than the carnal is the essence of the Satanist This problem is non-existent
with Sedan philosophy as the basic distinction between soma (body) and psyche (soul) is
recognized as a logical and intuitive fact
Interestingly this distinction has led to institutionalized practice of neither asceticism nor
libertinage, which we came to expect from Gnostic-derived schools emphasizing the
body/soul dichotomy. Sedan practice seems to reflect the older, more balanced and
individualized attitudes of Hellenic synthesis, harmony and moderation. A key to this is
tha t the Sedan attitude toward the dichotomy is not hostile or moralistic— it is merely
realized as fact as a starting point for further Work. It is not an end in itself, nor is the
eradication of one or the other a goal. Again this seems to reflect the most ancient view
untouched by the moralistic dualism of the Zoroastrians and Judeo-Christians.
— Sedan Magical Technology —
Black Magic in Theory and Practice
Those who tread the left-hand path do so using magical technology— the operations of
their own Wills. In the Sedan tradition of Michael Aquino magic, like everything else, is
treated to a thorough analysis, and noetic apprehension. Aquino’s precise definitions and
discussions of magical theory reject over-generalizations such as might be found in the
works of Aleister Crowley, who defined “Magick” as “the Science and Art of causing
Change to occur in conformity with WiU.”(32) The real differences between what Aquino
defines as White Magic and Black Magic, and between lesser and greater aspects of these
methods, make it necessaty to keep each type distinct
The chief problem with Crowley’s definition from a Sedan point of view would seem
to be the definition of “Will” Often times the Will of an individual is more illusion, or the
result of “mass hypnosis” than many would care to admit
According to Aquino’s analysis presented in Black Magic in Theory and Practice there
are two approaches (natural and non-natural) to the two universes (objective and
subjective). (33)
The natural approach to the objective universe is an effort to blend with that universe, to
become one with Nature or God. Humans feel themselves to be apart from the natural order
(which they are). But usually respond to it by feeling “sinful” or “out of harmony”— and
proceed to attempt to integrate themselves into the perceived order. This is the essence of
the highest purpose of White Magic— whether performed by monotheists or “Nature
worshippers.” This is what one might call conventional religion— after all the Latin word
religio means “re-connection ”
The natural approach to the subjective universe is that of the atheistic objectivists,
materialists, or positivists. For them the subjective universe has no reality except as a
source for entertaining (and often profitable) products of the imagination. In this view the
subjective universe is in fact an illusion or unreality. The only value it serves is to provide
emotional pleasure (entertainment) or to illustrate the “realities” of the objective universe.
Epicureans, Sadeans, Marxists and to some extent LaVeyans fall into this category.
235
The non-natural approach to the objective universe is that of those who has realized that
they indeed stand apart from the objective universe and that attempts to merge with it are
pointless and illusory. At that juncture comes the understanding that the objective universe,
and things in it, can be used as a tool of the subjective universe. This knowledge allows
them to develop techniques for the control (or strong influencing) of entities and
phenomena in the objective universe in accordance with their Will. It is this type of magic at
which LaVeyan Satanism excels. This is what Aquino calls Lesser Black Magic. The wise
application of these principles requires rigorous ethical training and standards.
The non-natural approach to the subjective universe is the purview of Greater Black
Magic. It is the direct focusing of “the Will of the creative self to adjust features of the
subjective universes (personal and others’) to the desired state, which may or may not be
‘real’ in the objective universe.” By this method it is possible to transform the content of
the subjective universe and influence patterns and events in the objective universe, neither
of which is easy to master.
Essentially White Magic is the submission of the subjective universe to the inherent
mechanical or organic patterns of the objective universe, while Black Magic is the exercise
of the subjective universe’s (the psyche’s) Will to Power.
Aquino sums up the various approaches to the universes with the words:
One is taught to become expert in natural approaches to the objective universe
through conventional education in the social and physical sciences, and in
natural approaches to the subjective universe through the arts. The Church of
Satan taught the theory and practice of Lesser Black magic, and the Temple of
Set adds to that the theory and practice of Greater Black Magic.(34)
Setian White Magic
Paradoxical as it might seem, true Black Magicians may freely use White Magic— at
least for pragmatic acts of sorcery, and as long as it is done with awareness and
understanding. This is a practical form of White Magic, not a philosophically consistent
one. That is, it is not practiced as a part of a right hand-path philosophy. Furthermore, it is
the kind of magic practiced by most “conventional” magicians— whether they are
Christians, Pagans, Thelemites, Chaotics, or even LaVeyan Satanists.
White Magic is a highly concentrated form of conventional religious ritual.
The practitioner seeks to focus his awareness and powers of concentration via
an extreme degree of autohypnosis. The technique may be used simply for
meditation or entertainment through mental imagery (“astral travel”). Or it may
be used to focus the will towards a desired end— a cure, curse, etc. To
accomplish this, the magician envisions a god or daemon with the power to
achieve the objective, then concentrates his will into an appeal. The god or
daemon then carries out the appeal, more or less effectively— depending on
the strength of the magician’s subconscious mind to sustain it as a functioning
entity. (35)
In practice this kind of White Magic can be put to any use, and have virtually any
configuration. Angels or gods, daemons or spirits could be conjured by the psyche and
used as a focus of the will for a variety of purposes. The difference between the committed
White Magician and the Black Magician who on occasion uses White Magical techniques
for practical ends is that the White Magician has as his ultimate goal the fusion of his self-
awareness with the mechanisms of the Universe, while the Black Magician merely uses the
technique for temporary, critical and pragmatic ends. White Magic is simply easier and
more flexible to use than Black Magic, and requires less training and a lower level of
essential Being to operate.
236
It was Anton LaVey’s acceptance of the assumption that “black magic” was either “evil”
magic, or magic using “demons” instead of angels, or the like, which led him to conclude
that there is no difference between “black” and ‘"white” magic.
At die highest level of Understanding of the Will— all magic is Black Magic because
the fully articulated and aware Will (or psyche) will neither desire nor need techniques
which lead it, even temporarily into a state of illusory "'union” with the objective universe.
The Practice of Lesser Black Magic
As a general rule of practice, the Sedan, like the LaVeyan Satanist, will not use Greater
(Black) Magic when Lesser means could be more rationally employed to gain the same
ends. (Magic itself should in fact only be used when natural means are not sufficient)
Aquino defines Lesser Black Magic as “the influencing of beings, processes, or objects in
the objective universe by the application of obscure physical or behavioral laws ”(36)
Perhaps the key to understanding the practice of Lesser Black Magic is the fact that it
works entirely through instruments in the objective universe, which must be perceived by
any targeted subjective universes (the minds of others) through their five sense organs.
Lesser Black Magic works largely in and through the world of five senses and three
dimensions.
On one level this is little more than the “trivial pursuits” of grammar, rhetoric and logic
as taught by the ancients— it is a way of effectively communicating your desires to others
that they will wish to harmonize their wills with yours. It can be seen as the art and practice
of “winning friends and influencing people”— but what keeps it a Black Magical category
is the level of consciousness or Self-awareness the magician brings to the operation.
Without the awareness of the dichotomy between the subjective universe of the operator
and the objective universe in which the operator is working, the Black Magical perspective
or focus can be lost
Almost the entirety of the previous chapter on the Church of Satan and the philosophy
of Anton LaVey is a treatise on the development and practice of a system of Lesser Black
Magic.
The Practice of Greater Black Magic
In the Black Magic in Theory and Practice Greater Black Magic is defined as “the
causing of change to occur in the subjective universe in accordance with WilL This change
in the subjective universe will cause a similar an proportionate change in the objective
universe.”(37) In contrast to White Magic, according to Sedan theory: “Black Magic
involves no autohypnosis or conditioning of the mind to make it receptive to subconscious
imagery. Rather it is a deliberate and conscious effort to force the mind outward— to
impact upon and alter the ‘laws’ of the mechanical Universe ”(38)
Black Magic is the function or technique for those philosophically aligned with the aims
of the left-hand path. It might be said that Black Magic (as defined by Aquino) is
synonymous with the practice of the left-hand path itself.
In the Book of Coming Forth by Night it is written: “Now let the Sedan shun all
recitation, for the text of another is an affront to the Self.”(39) This points up the enigmatic
— viewed form the outside — character of true Black Magic. Such operations can not be
“seen,” nor can they be reduced to recipes, formulas aud rituals— they are beyond the
mechanical parameters implied by these categories. True Black Magic requires no props or
symbols, no ritual or invocations— although certain things may be used to bring the
subjective universe (= psyche) into a state of isolation in preparation for a true Working of
Greater Black Magic.
The psyche is the god, or the closest thing to a god, to which most Setians have direct
access. It is primarily for this reason that the Sedan also shuns the use of drugs or narcotics
of any kind. Such substances hinder and limit the capacity of the very thing the Sedan is
supposedly attempting to strengthen and develop. Clearly drugs hinder the capacity of the
Wilt and so true Sedan magic cannot be enhanced by their use.
237
As in LaVeyan Satanism there is no established ritual, but there is a basic formula used
as a framework for Workings of Greater Black Magic outlined in the Crystal Tablet. In
many respects this has been derived from the formula given in LaVey’s Satanic Bible.
Important differences include the lighting of a fire upon the altar— chemically treated to
make the flame with a blue-black color — to symbolize the Black Flame and to open a
gateway of co mmunic ation between the celebrant(s) and the Prince of Darkness.
Another factor is the wording of an Invocation to Set written by Aquino— in principle
this is used in most Sedan group rituals. It is a verbal symbol which connects all Sedans in
those times/places where magical work is done.
Sedan ritual symbolism is also sexually neutral— there are no nude altars, phalli, and
so on. These are not forbidden, but merely thought to be inappropriate to most working
aims— and therefore unnecessary. The presence of animals — unless essential to the
symbolism of the working — is discouraged.
Perhaps most importantly the Temple expressly forbids the presence of non-members at
workings. No tourists, “observers,” and so on who merely “want to see what’s going on
with those weird Black Magicians.” Filming or photographing actual rituals is also strongly
discouraged. Non-participants can never fully comprehend what actually occurs in such an
environment If Catholicism were not so well established and familiar more people might
think all that bell clanging, genuflecting, and censer swinging by guys in dresses wearing
pointy caps was pretty strange too. But die believing Catholic feels himself to participate in
the Passion of his Savior through this formula. This unseen aspect is even stronger in
Sedan Workings, which actually take place in a non-natural realm.
One whole important category of the practice of Setian Greater Black Magic is that
which involves the direct communication with the Set-entity. This is a difficult task to
accomplish in reality, and one that is generally thought to require at least a level of initiation
equal to that of the Priesthood of Set (HI 0 ). First the very act of consciously setting one’s
Self apart from the laws of the Universe is a step in this direction, because in doing so the
Setian commits “‘the same crime against God (= the Universe) as did the Set-entity.”(40)
This then would be an act in imitation of the original rebellion of consciousness against the
Universal order— whether in the mythology of the Egyptians (= Set), or of the Greeks (=
first Zeus then Prometheus), or the Germanics (= Odin), and so on. The next step is the
actual communication with the Set-entity as an independent being— which is an even more
profound violation of the natural order. Reliable contact of this kind is only thought to be
possible for Masters of the Temple.
— Xeper —
Initiatory Black Magic
The central magical Work of a Setian Black Magician is his or her own Xeper. This is
the “Great Work” upon which the Will must be focused. As outlined on pages 000 above,
the Temple of Set initiatory degree system is a map or guiding instrument for the general
parameters of that Xeper-process. Transformations which take place in the essence or
Being of the individual during this process are “objective” ones in the sense that they are
real and permanent— although the effects of magical Work can be undone through
negligence and subsequent laziness.
In many respects the initiatory system of the Temple is based on a framework similar to
that employed by Plato when describing the levels of knowledge and being students in his
academy would undergo in their quests to become Philosopher-Kings. (See chapter 3.)
This same structure underlies most western “occult systems”— although many try to
obscure this fact. It is a system which has its objective criteria, and is founded in reality,
and hence it forms a useful instrument for personal initiation.
In this system the initiate moves from a state of relative guess-work to one of objective
certainty based upon knowledge (or Understanding) which comes from direct apprehension
of the First Forms lying at the root of all phenomena in the objective and subjective
universes. This comes only after sufficient “scientific” training in the observation of, and
238
interaction with, the objective world has been successfully undertaken. This is one of the
things which seems to distinguish the Transcendental from the Immanent Branches of the
Left-Hand Path. The Transcendental Branch assumes the transformations taking place in
the subjective universe are real and require work, as does the transformation of any real
thing. While the Immanent Branch, as exemplified by the latter-day philosophy of LaVey,
assumes that the subjective universe (such as it exists) is a relatively static thing— one must
merely “realize one’s innate godhood”— rather than work to transmute the “substance” of
the subjective universe into a divine state.
— Ultima Futura —
The Vision of the Temple of Set
There is no more forward looking, or “future oriented,” school of the left-hand path
than the Temple of Set One of its reading list categories is called ‘The Future,” and another
is devoted to space exploration aud scientific frontiers.
In die early years of the Temple there was a strong apocalyptic, almost millenarian,
aspect to it. This was perhaps first based on a passage in the Book of Coming Forth by
Night which says:
I seek my Elea an none other, for mankind now hastens toward an
annihilation which none but the Elect may hope to avoid. And alone I cannot
preserve my Elect, but I would teach them and strengthen their Will against
the coming peril, that their blood may endure. To do this I must give further
of my own Essence to my Elect, and, should they fail, the Majesty of Set
shall fade and be ended, (p. 22)
There was for a while in the late 1970s even somewhat of a survivalist mentality among
some members of the Temple as these words in the Book of Coming Forth by Night were
taken more literally than they have been in more recent years. In his 1985 commentary on
this passage in the text Aquino wrote:
During the first several years of the Aeon, I was inclined to interpret the
warning of this passage in terms of the general ecological crisis confronting
the human race as a whole during the next century. While factors presaging
that crisis remain, it is increasingly obvious that the Temple of Set is far too
selective in scope aud interests to be a significant factor in confronting it It
seems more probable that Set’s warning is meant to alert the Elea to the
general fear which profane humans feel concerning Initiates of the Black Art
and in particular their tendency to search out scapegoats during times of
stress, confusion, and crisiSu {BCFBN, p. 22.)
More recently the tenor of the Temple’s orientation has been more toward the individual
and more academic, in the Platonic sense. Initiates, engaged in the affairs of the world, but
magically isolated at Will from what Aquino has dubbed “the World of Horrors”
(uninitiated society), seem to be most likely to survive any upheavals in that world. As this
‘World of Horrors” perhaps becomes progressively more stupid and brutish, ever more
narrow and simple-minded, the Temple of Set expects to have its resources for initiation
called upon more and more as “refugees” from that uninitiated realm seek sustenance in a
rational and rigorous system.
The Orders within the Temple of Set are projected to grow and give the Temple an
increasingly multidimensional aspect. These will develop more and more sophisticated and
specialized magical disciplines and techniques, each with its own contribution to what the
future holds for the Temple as a whole.
239
As far as the ‘‘World of Honors” is concerned, it seems clear that it will go on more or
less as it has always been. The only way the Temple of Set will have an impact upon its
quality is by facilitating the true Initiation of individuals into the essence of the left-hand
path. The influence of those individual Black Magicians will then make impact on the
World of Horrors as it fulfills the unique Wills of those individuals. And so is done the
Will of Set
Michael Aquino and the Left-Hand Path
It is clear that what Michael Aquino has done with the Temple of Set is quite different
from what Anton LaVey did with his Church of Satan. They have differing philosophies
but both are equally part of the left-hand path. In fact each exemplify the essence of the
Transcendental and Immanen t Branches of that Path, as I have defined them.
LaVey an Satanism accepts and revels in the role of the eternal adversary. Its theoretical
mandate is to oppose every norm. Setian philosophy is based on an elitist and hierarchized
theory, but is not necessarily adversarial. Set is seen as something opposed to a certain
thing (Nature), but not systemically opposed to any and everything. This distinction is
inherent in the mythic systems from which their respective philosophical ideas am drawn:
Satanism from an anti-establishment mythology (Satan’s rebellion against God), Setian
religion from a previously established super- or extraordinary system (the ancient cult of
Set). Satanism poses a head to head, or lateral, opposition, whereas Setian thought poses a
vertical opposition.
In the greater historical perspective, LaVey an Satanism accepts (or came to accept) the
matter/spirit dichotomy of the ancient Gnostics— but declares its allegiance with the
demiurge — the creator of matter and the flesh — as the “good god.” In the ancient system
this would have been Yahweh/Iao! But even in LaVey’s system he must refer to something
which separates man from “the other animals” (for better or worse) and to something else
when addressing the issue of the possibility of immortality.
In the Setian philosophy of Michael Aquino these contradictions are cleared away
rationally by seeking and finding that which does separate man from the rest of the
Universe. This opposition then becomes the core of the philosophy. Humanity, and most
especially the Elect, stand apart from the “laws of the Um verse/God”
This Setian equation between the Judeo-Christian God and Nature is one most
troubling to modem would-be Nature-worshippers— because they usually like to think of
themselves as being somehow on the opposite side from old “Jehovah”— he being
somehow “supernatural” while they are “natural.” But Setian philosophy is practiced on a
level beyond these concerns, although they can be explained historically. Adherents of
orthodox religions who have sought a “God” who created “heaven and earth” simply have
misinterpreted the more subtle laws of nature as “the laws of God.” In fact, according to
Setian ideas, these are both aspects of the static regularity or internal consistency of the
objective universe. Ultimately it is not a question of core importance to the Setian.
The Setian steps back and observes the picture form a new angle and sees the true
distinction between Intelligence and non-intelligence in the Universe. Intelligence
“opposes” stasis and regularity — both in “God” and “Nature” — which are both marked
by their static and inflexible laws.
The magical Setian philosophy of Michael Aquino exemplifies the Transcendental
Branch of the Left-Hand Path it is philosophically antinomian — violating cosmic law —
and in times of social stress has shown itself ready and willing to become a symbol of
conventional antinomianism as well. Curiously, when it was still relatively comfortable to
call one’s self a “Satanist” most Setians did not manifest a “Satanic” image, but as the
social climate became more intolerant, the Setian philosophical antinomianism was activated
and the “Satanic” imagery resurfaced— as an apparent act of cosmic and philosophical
defiance against the ignorance and stupidity that drove the intolerance.
240
The ultimate aim of Sedan philosophy is an active, aware and potent state of relative
immortality for the isolate, individual psyche. This is achieved through a system of magic
which must of necessity be to a great extent the unique invention of the psyche of the
subject of the transformation or metamorphosis. It seems essential to the process, however,
that it be a matter of Will, and that it be undertaken in grades or stages only as quickly as
the conscious mind is able to absorb and understand the process it is undergoing.
The magical philosophy of Michael Aquino is certainly the most sophisticated theory of
its kind to be expounded in modem times. This discussion can only provide the outlines of
the system, of course. The future will hold more Mysteries and more unfoldings of the
Word of the Aeon.
Xepera Xeper Xeperu
Notes for Chapter 10
(1) Michael A. Aquino, The Book of Coming Forth by Night: Analysis and Commentary ( San
Francisco: Temple of Set, 1985), p. 20. .. „
(2) Michael A. Aquino, “Black Magic in Theory and Practice” [= Crystal Tablet , pp. 1-61J (San
Francisco: The Temple of Set, [various dates]), p. 13.
(3) Aquino, Book of Coming Forth by Night , p. 20.
(4) Michael A. Aquino, The Church of Satan (San Francisco: The Temple of Set, 1989), Appendix 9.
(5) Aquino, The Church of Satan, p. 45.
(6) Aquino, The Church of Satan, Appendix 10.
(7) Aquino, The Church of Satan, Appendix 72.
(8) Aquino, Book of Coming Forth by Night, p, 26.
(9) Aquino, Book of Coming Forth by Night , p. 9.
(10) Nevill Drury, The Occult Experience (Garden City Park, NY: Avery, 1989), p. 114)
(11) Drury, The Occult Experience, p. 119-120.
(12) Aquino, “Black Magic in Theory and Practice,” p. 59.
(13) Aquino, “Black Magic in Theory and Practice ” p. 60.
(14) Aquino, “Black Magic in Theory and Practice,” p. 61.
(15) Bram Stoker, Dracula. New York: Signet, 1965 [1897], p. 246.
(16) Aquino, Book of Coming Forth by Night, Appedix 2, p.15.
(17) Aquino, “Black Magic in Theory and Practice,” p. 3.
(18) Aquino, “Black Magic in Theory and Practice,” p. 3.
(19) Aquino, “Black Magic in Theory and Practice,” p. 3.
(20) Aquino, “Black Magic in Theory and Practice,” p. 7.
(21) Aquino, Book of Coming Forth by Night, p. 20.
(22) Aquino, Book of Coming Forth by Night, p. 10.
(23) Aquino, Book of Coming Forth by Night , p. 5.
(24) Aquino, Michael A. Genesis m. (= Letter to the Priesthood of Set, September 29, [1975]).
(25) Aquino, Book of Coming Forth by Night, p. 7.)
(26) Aquino, Book of Coming Forth by Night, pp. 15; 17.
(27) Aquino, Book cf Coming Forth by Night, p. 10.
(28) Aquino, Genesis HI.
(29) Aquino, Book of Coming Forth by Night, p. 22.
(30) Michael A. Aquino, “The Secrets of Life and Death.” Cloven Hoof 5:1 (JanVFeb. 1973), pp. 1-10.
(31) Michael A. Aquino, “The Secrets of Life and Death H.” Runes 1:2 (Sept, 1983), p. 3.
(32) Aleister Crowley, Magick (New York: Weiser, 1973), p. 131.
(33) Aquino, “Black Magic in Theory and Practice,” pp. 14-20.
(34) Aquino, “Black Magic in Theory and Practice,” p. 19.
(35) Aquino, Book of Coming Forth by Night, p. 23.
(36) Aquino, “Black Magic in Theory and Practice " p. 21.
(37) Aquino, ‘Slack Magic in Theory and Practice,” p. 28.
(38) Aquino, Book of Coming Forth by Night, pp. 23-24.
(39) Aquino, Book of Coming Forth by Night, p. 23.
(40) Aquino, Book of Coming Forth by Night, p. 24.
242
Appendix
The Urban Legend of Satanicism
Much of the impetus for writing this book came from the need to demonstrate to an
intelligent reading public the true character of the left-hand path. This was necessitated, I
felt, by the monstrous emergence of rabid and irrational hatreds and fears manifesting
themselves in western culture especially during late 1980s.
What the people fear and hate is not so much the left-hand path and Satanism as it
actually is, and as it is actually practiced, as it is their own inner idea or notion of what it is
or must be. This fantastic phenomenon, this mythic form of “Satanism” which seems to
exist in no reality other than the subjective one of its creators, I chose to call by the
neologism “Satanicism.” This is done to keep the term Satanism uncontaminated by
fictional creations of right-hand path paranoia.
The best explanation of the “Satan scare” phenomena of the late 1980s is to be found in
the complex world of urban legends or myths. This is not to dismiss the importance or
danger of such mythologizing, or to reject the whole phenomenon as “pure fantasy.” There
is something real going on— it's just not what it seems to be.
An urban legend is most often encountered in the form of wild, usually weird, stories
that range from “Lady of the Lake” ghost tales, to exploding poodle-dogs in microwave
ovens. Cases of urban legends have been collected and studied by University of Utah
folklorist Jan Harold Brunvand in several volumes such as The Vanishing Hitchhiker
(1981) and The Choking Doberman (1984). Urban legends almost always start with: “A
friend of a friend of min e said that...” They are always close enough or specific enough to
be effective, yet far away enough to be beyond confirmation. It is essential to the
effectiveness of an urban legend that it not be subjected to verification. All those which
have been so studied have been shown to be purely fictional creations.
These urban legend do have dramatic effects on society, however. Not one confirmed
case of strangers putting poison, glass or razor blades in kids’ candy at Halloween has
been confirmed All such cases were either faked by attention-seeking kids— or were the
results of abuse inflicted on the children by their own parents. In spite of this, “trick or
treat” customs have been disrupted, and hospitals even offer free x-raying of Halloween
candy!
Two popular urban legends that have affected major US corporations are that
MacDonald’s sent a portion of their profits to the Church of Satan and that the (old) Proctor
and Gamble logo was a Satanic symbol— a man in the moon and some stars. Both of these
legends are, of course, fictitious. However, Proctor and Gamble eventually changed their
logo due to unrelenting public pressure.
Two investigators who have looked at the “Satan scare” from the viewpoint of the
urban legend or depth psychology are Arthur Lyons in his Satan Wants You and Chas
Clifton in an article for Gnosis magazine. Both have concluded that most, if not all, of the
tales of “Satanic day-care centers,” “breeder cults ” and so on ad nauseam, are the stuff of
either urban legend or disturbed minds.
243
Recent History
When we look at this most recent phenomenon, which reached its peak with the
Geraldo Rivera special in October 1988 on “Satanic crime,” we discover a definite
historical trend stretching back approximately 30 years.
Around 1975 reports of cattle mutilations swept the western United States— these were
all said to be the work of a well-organized Satanic cult Official investigations showed them
to be the work of predators. But in the anxiety ridden, post-Watergate, US Satanic cults
seemed to be more the preferred “popular” answer.
In 1980 there appeared one of the first commercial exploitations of the new wave of cult
anxiety. This came in the form of a collaboration between a certain “Michelle Smith” and a
psychiatrist. Dr. Lawrence Pazder. Together they produced a book called Michelle Remem¬
bers based on “memories” Michelle was able to produce while being treated by Dr. Pazder.
In this book “Michelle” recounts the horrible cultic abuse she suffered at the hands of her
family and strangers— complete with the depiction of the sacrifice and eating of infants.
These accounts and others produced in the 1980s are remarkably similar to those produced
by the Roman and Christian commentators many centuries ago. (See chapter 5.) No hard
evidence was ever found to corroborate Michelle’s story, but it continues to be accepted as
true by those who need to believe. Dr. Pazder was so impressed he married ‘Michelle.”
The anxiety and malaise of the mid- and late-1970s was combined with the ideology of
the religious right in the Reagan-dominated 1980s and the “Satan scare” was poised for
development Soon, bolstered by the pattern of Dr. Pazder and Michelle, there was a whole
circuit of patients and their therapists traveling about like so many snake-oil salesmen
hawking their wares of fear and dread to any who would listen— and pay their fees.
Another twist in the story arose in the early 1980s — the theme of the “Satanic Day-
Care Center.” This came to its nauseating zenith in the famous McMartin day-care center
case. A mentally disturbed, suicidal mother of one of the children accused the school of
abusing her child. Therapists (inquisitors) were brought in to question the children. After
being subjected to their therapy the children began to come up with stories of rituals,
devils, bunny-sacrifices, subterranean chambers with lions in cages, and flights to far away
cities to attend unspeakable rites, and so on. The ensuing trial was the most expensive in
California history— most charges were finally dropped, and in the end no one was
convicted of anything. But many lives, both of die owners and staff of the school as well
as of the children and concerned parents, were destroyed or seriously damaged. The only
ones to benefit were the therapists (they got paid, their reputations, at least temporarily,
were enhanced) and the lawyers and other legal professionals. The telling question of
“Who gains?” can be applied here with enlightening effect
The McMartin case was just the beginning of a massive wave of similar cases.
Investigations were undertaken by law enforcement officials all over the country, some of
whom began to “specialize” in “occult crime.” Amateur and professional theologians and
their possessed and abused “ex-cultists” produced books and went on talk shows. “The
devil made me do if’ becomes a legal defence for crimes great and small.
By die late 1980s “Satanic crime” was the hottest selling topic on the talk show circuit.
False acquisitions made against the High Priest of the Temple of Set, Michael Aquino
brought “philosophical Satanism” to center stage for the first time— which was the
beginning of the end of die “Satanic scare.” This is because the High Priest was able to
fight back against the falsehoods about Satanism and eventually the truth began to emerge.
But the “scare” would continue for several years to come.
Perhaps the crest of the wave of public paranoia came with the Geraldo special in
October of 1988. The media — electronic and print—was full of accounts of “Satanic” or
ritual crime and abuse. Case after case was heard of people (mainly women— perhaps
because they are the chief consumers of this material) ritually abused as children who
“suddenly remember” it all under therapy, or in some cases due to religious conversions
(shades of Diana Vaughn!).
244
Habeas corpus!
Finally the shocking, yet simple and rational questions began to be heard: Who did this
(name some names), where are the bodies, were the police informed? Questions like this
had been “asked” all along, but the public was not ready to hear the question or the actual
answers. The crushing answers began to come in late 1989 and early 1990.
In October of 1989 the National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime at the FBI
Academy in Quantico, Virginia issued a paper by Kenneth V. Lanning. It is an detailed
analysis of all the charges of “satanic” or ritual crime brought in the US over the previous
decade. The paper concludes in part: “After the hype and hysteria is put aside, the
realization sets in that most satanic/occult activity involves the commission of NO crimes,
and that which does usually involves the commission of relatively minor crimes...”
Later that same year Shawn Carlson and Gerald Larue issued Satanism in America:
How the Devil Got Much More Then His Due as a final report for the Committee for the •
Scientific Examination of Religion. This work systematically dismantles the scam
perpetrated by some law enforcement officials in conjunction with modem day free-lance
witch-hunters. In their Abstract of the book the authors summarize their findings
summarize their findings:
A great hoax is being perpetrated on the American public. A small group of
religious fanatics, political extremists, bereaved parents, and the mentally ill,
as well as a few well-intentioned individuals, are appearing on talk shows at
police training seminars, at criminal trials and in newspaper interviews as
“expert” witnesses with an alarming message: Satanism is rampant in
America; Devil-worshippers are killin g millions of children; Satanism is
seducing teens into suicide pacts and driving our youth to violence.... These
experts have gone virtually unchallenged... until now. As a result, lives have
been destroyed, the practice of legitimate minority religions has been infringed
and many millions of dollars have been wasted chasing the Devil’s tail.
The allegations of large scale Satanic conspiracies are totally without
foundation. In fact, the available evidence leaves only one reasonable
conclusion: they do not exist l{ p. v.)
They go on to chronicle the real violence and sickness practiced by the letter-day witch-
hunters themselves— as always in the name of God and Jesus. Some are seen to be
mentally disturbed on one level of another, while others are following an extremist
Christian political agenda.
In February of 1990 a rational voice was heard from a surprising, yet welcome, comer:
the Christian media. Gretehen and Bob Passantino and Jon Trott published an article in the
Christian magazine Cornerstone . This was an expose of the book Satan’s Underground by
Lauren Stratford (Laurel Wilson) with help and promotion from Johanna Michaelson.
Apparently even the rational Christians had heard about all they could stand by this time.
Closer investigation into the life of Laurel showed a pathetically disturbed hysteric whose
accusations of abuse began when she was a teenager— and were for years first directed
against family members and pastors of churches. It wasn’t until 1985 that “satanism ’
became a part of her stories. She had been caught up in the then profitable business of the
“Satan scare.”
In 1991 the book In Pursuit of Satan by Robert D. Hicks finished the job of blowing the
lid off of the law-enforcement/ psychotherapy/ fundamentalism cabal showing, from an
objective point of view, how unscrupulous police, therapists and activists of various
stripes, have gotten together to invent the whole “Satan scare” to bolster their own
positions and causes- . , , „ r .
Both Satanism in America and In Pursuit of Satan approach the Satan scare from the
perspective of an urban legend.
245
These beginnings of rationality have not quelled the hysteria completely, of course.
More books and more tabloid-type media presentations would appear, but the rational law
enforcement officials as well as established religious leaders had begun to see the light The
“scare” moved more and more to the fringes. But there is no reason to conclude that
ignorance and stupidity will remain down for long...
So what, if anything, is happening out there in America to make people believe that
Satanic cults are abducting their children, breeding babies for sacrifice and lurking behind
every bush in suburbia? There is a phenomenon here, but it is not what it seems. The roots
of the phenomenon are not in the groups and individuals this book is about— they are in
the minds of those whose vague fears and narrow world views make them ripe for belief in
monstrous conspiracies of evil forces all around them. These are the people who need to
believe in these urban legends because of their non-specific anxieties and fears, and who
have the burning desire to believe in order to alleviate their grinding boredom and sense of
insi gnif icance. The “Satan scare” of the 1980s was in many ways an attempt by bored
individuals to make life interesting and exiting— it was more fun to believe that such evil
conspiracies existed than to believe they did not exist Most people believe what it gives
them pleasure to believe, or what they need to believe because of their own inner fears.
America’s first “witch scare,” 300 years ago in Salem, and its latest have much in
common. The Salem witch trials were carried out by Puritans with an extremely narrow
world view— which allowed for little variation or personal freedom. Things which were
different from the “norm” were looked upon with suspicion. At the same time, many of the
parents of Salem had to work hard all day long, just to be able to survive in the harsh new
land. In 1692 taxes were high, war raged about them and smallpox was in the land. They
entrusted the care of their children to servants. One in particular was a West Indian woman
named Tituba. When a group of pubescent girls for whom Tituba cared exhibited strange
behavior and fits (probably first brought on by accidental ergot poisoning) the adults
thought it must be witchcraft Hie children were put to the question by the reverend folk
and began at first to accuse social misfits— the slave Tituba, the beggar Sarah Good and
the cripple Sarah Osborne. But before it was over many, including one of the reverends
himself, were either hanged or pressed to death for witchcraft
Our society today is under s imil ar in some cases more subtle, and in some cases more
profound, strains and stresses. Society is in many ways breaking down completely— the
cultural norms that brought us up from the stone age are disintegrating. In two generations
we have gone from multigenerational households — with children, parents and often
grandparents, great aunts and uncles, and so on — to nuclear families — with children and
parents — to a time when most children are either in single parent households or in
households where both parents must work to meet (at least perceived) economic needs. The
upshot of this is that most kids are raised by a combination of television, other kids and
hired help (school teachers and day-care workers). There is a tremendous amount of
archetypal stress put on a culture when such transformations occur.
These sociological factors explain a good deal of the specifics with regard to “Satanistic“
phenomena: children exhibit “strange” behaviors (strange to the parents because they hardly
see the kids), the whole world seems to be fallin g apart, parents can’t make enough money
to acquire the things they want, preachers and therapists abound telling them that demons
or organized cults of child molesters are lurking invisibly all around. It is always most
effective to cast such paranoid suspicion on things that simply do not exist— that way the
lack of objective evidence will: 1) make the evil seem all the more sinister, and 2) eusure
that no positive objective counter-evidence can be produced. It is not long before there is a
general “scare ” Of course, to the credit of the American people, such scares are not really
taken too seriously— because on some level everybody knows it’s show-biz. But this is
little consolation to the victims of the scare such as the McMartin workers or hundreds of
others accused in this manner.
246
There is a deeper interpretation. What is responsible for the need to believe in these
fearsome things— even when there is no evidence for them? The answer may be found in
depth psychology. Another phenomenon on the increase about the same time as stories of
“Satanicism” were tales of UFO abductees. These two phenomena have certain things in
common: powerful, usually invisible, conspirators; sexual overtones or dominant themes
(probings of the body, “breeding experiments,” etc.), and both are commonly things the
victims “remember 7 ’ after being subjected to “therapy.” The “survivors” of UFOs and
Satanic cults can explain their present unhappiness and maladjustments in terms of what
some evil villain has done to them in the past Perhaps this is some emerging, and truly
Satanic, twist of the myth of “original sin.” Now it is not the human who is responsible —
and the sinner — it is an external force. Man can now say: “Hey, it’s not my fault!”
Those who suffer from deep-seated fears will inevitably project images of those fears
into their environment. They will fear and detest that which they see around them which is
at the same time a reflection of those things within themselves they fear and loathe. They
fear and hate themselves, but instead of coming to terms with that, which is unacceptable,
they project it onto convenient scapegoats. In extreme cases these may be served by Satanic
cults or extraterrestrial invaders.
Another factor which can not go unmentioned when trying to explain the “Satanic scare’
is that of its recreational dimension. It is fun to believe in for some people. It is a
commodity, like reck n’ roll or Freddy Kruger. Mr. Kruger is a good illustration of this
phenomenon. The reason why there are so few “Hell-fire and brimstone” sermons in the
churches anymore is because we have folks like Mr. Kruger or Jason taking up the slack.
Those old sermons didn’t really scare anybody— they were sensationalistic entertainment
Now we have Clive Barker, we don’t need the reverend Joe-Bob Billy-Bob to do that any
more. But some of the “reverends” have simply tried to make their “Hell-fire and
brimstone” more believable by packaging it a bit differently. It’s still entertainment, and it
still sells. It’s also great fun for the sellers of this material. They get to tell all the lurid
details of their lives in the pomographic-orgiastic-homicidal-breeder cult, while testifying
all the while to their born-again status today. Many a “wolf’ would love to have a suit of
those “sheep’s clothing!” Just as it is with drugs, as long as there is a market for this kind
of stuff, there will be providers of it
The modem-day witch-hunters have followed in the free-lancing footsteps of Matthew
Hopkins and others of the Protestant tradition who took the Malleus Malificarium as their
handbook (today an “occult crime seminar,” or a “best-selling” book on the subject) and
went to work hunting heretics, Satan-worshippers for fun and profit Any one who can
create a “scare” has done his work— and then he appears with the antidote: more seminars,
more books, more television exposes... .
It seems clear that the vast majority of the honor stories of Satanic cults circulated over
the past two decades should must be relegated to the “urban legend file.” Does this mean
the whole episode has been harmless? Or that we can forget it? Not in the least Because it
will come b a ck, as all such phenomena do. And it does do harm: millions, if not billions of
tax dollars are wasted on therapists, police investigations, and trials (!); the already
epidemic anxiety is ouly exacerbated; fraud is committed by ex-cultists prying even more
hard-earned money out of the hands of a fearful populace, and worst of all attention is
deflected from the real problems of the break-down of die family and child abuse (which is
rarely the act of strangers in “Satanistic” cults and almost always the work of other
members of the child’s own family). This latter point is perhaps what has been the driving
motivation behind much of this phenomenon— the family itself is morally sick and
bankrupt and the “Satanistic cult” is the imaginary scapegoat.
All we can do is call for rationality to be exercised notin a passive way, but in an active
one: Meet the problem were it actually is (in the minds of the accusers and in their own
families), ask the hard questious (who, what, where, when, how?), and when the answers
are found, act to bring light to the subject.
247
Terminus Viae
Afterword
The left-hand path is the way of the hero— the path of those who would dare breech
the gates of eternity, to eat of the tree of life eternal having understood their own individual
divinities. To stand against the inertia and ignorance of the whole of the universe— to
strive against that which would thwart all intelligence and life— and to prevail against it, is
the aim of the path sinister.
The left-hand path is simply the way of non-union, of individuation, of independence.
The right hand path by contrast is the way of union, of collectivization, of dependence.
What the left-hand path is not is “evil.” In fact, those who follow the left-hand path (by any
name) today most closely approximate the ancient ideal of seeking the agathon — ‘the
Good.” On the left-hand path initiates seek to develop the Self to the point of divinity— this
heightened sense of Self, once sufficiently developed, prevents any acts of true evil on the
part of initiates because they have come to know and understand the Good.
The via sinistra is the path of sovereigns— those who would exercise sovereign power
over themselves and their environments. Historical evidence for the presence of a true left-
hand path is only obvious in cultures originally shaped by Indo-European ideology (Egypt
being the only possible exception). The extremely ancient sovereign values of eternal fife
and unlimited power of the Self are reflected in the philosophy of the left-hand path.
I have shown that there are two distinct approaches to the left-hand path: the
Transcendental Branch and the Immanent Branch. The Transcendental Branch of the Left-
Hand Path makes use of an uncompromisingly subjective approach to the extant subjective
universe— and thereby ultimately realizes the full reality and sovereignty of the Self. The
Immanent Branch of the Left-Hand Path takes an indirect route. Those who go this way
focus on their independent carnal existences and travel through images in the objective
universe to arrive at a mysterious, often verbally indefinable state of being beyond the
images. The branches terminate in a s imilar state, but their appearances are different.
The world needs to come to understand something of the left-hand path at this point in
history as never before. This is because the world is now largely operating under a left-
hand path paradigm. It is clear that the motivations for most (post-)modem individuals
revolve around the extension of life, independence, freedom, knowledge, power and
pleasure— we live in a Faustian, or Mephistophelean Age. The sooner the true character of
the Age is recognized, the sooner those who live in it will be able to move about with some
sense of confidence. This Age has taken an Age to arrive— but if we look to the older Age,
and to those isolated individuals within the Age just passing, we will see examples of those
who have mastered the path, who are Lords of the Left-Hand Path.
A Lord of die Left-Hand Path is one who has prevailed against the laws of the
mechanical universe— the laws of stupidity, blind obedience to brute force, and eternal
death of the intelligence— and created from substance of the self by means of Will
immortal identity which is in and of itself the greatest defiance against the universe. Such a
one stands alone amidst the storms and stresses all about— yet is not alone. For across the
abysmal seas of the World of Horrors such a one will see and come to know other dark
stars hovering over the waters. By knowing them the star of the singular self is made to
bum with a brilliance of darkness unto the glory of desire.
249
Should there come a point in which all the individual intelligences scattered about the
vastuess beyond the borders of time and space are extinguished by force of Necessity— it
is their glory which will give the greatest brilliance to the whole which, even if for ouly a
fleeting moment, comes into being.
The only true enemy of the left-hand path is ignorance: the grinding human condition
bom of fear and expressed in vehement hatred. But this resistance too can be turned to
strength by the power of the Will which belongs to the left-hand path to command. Where
such ignorance is found, the Lord of the path will transform them into an illustration and
illumination of the principles which distinguish his brilliance and intelligence from the
obscurity and gloom which surrounds him. The left-hand path can break the bounds of
time and reach back to discover moments which give strength to his purpose of will and
which form the resistance which gives shape and direction to his power. In this way he
defies the compulsions and coercions of die past— thwarting beyond time his eternal
enemies who have embodied ignorance— and endow those moments with limitless
possibilities for the future.
Salem, Massachusetts
31 October 1992ce
Reyn til Runaf
250
Glossary
antinomian: Derived from the Greek anti-nomos, “against the law (nomos)” Here against
the laws of God, the mechanical/organic universe, and especially irrational
psychological or social compulsion, convention or habit
Black Magic: A methodology for the exercise of independence from the universe and
pursuit of self-oriented aims as defined by the left-hand path*
Devil, the: From the Greek diabolos , “slanderer, enemy,” see the Prince of Darkness
duotheism: The idea that there are two objectively separate forms of divinity arranged along
sexually polarized lines— the God and the Goddess. Prevalent in both Indian tantrism
(Shiva/Shakti) and modem Wicca, or witchcraft,
evil: Term used to characterize unconscious acts of criminality and cruelty among humans.
Conscious evil is impossible. Often used by right-hand path fanatics to designate followers
of the left-hand path. See good.
good: Term used to characterize objects or acts which either demonstrate or promote
consciousness and self-realization or knowledge. Often inconsistently used by right-
hand path fanatics to designate things for which they have a sentimental attachment See
evil.
heretic: From Greek hairetikos 7 “one who is able to choose.” Used to designate those who
hold rebellious, unorthodox views or beliefs. A heretic practices heresy— which is
often a punishable offence where right-hand path fanatics control society. See
heterodox.
heterodox: From Greek heterodoxos, “differing in opinion.” Used to designate a heretic, or
one who has opinions different from those accepted by the norms of society. See
heretic.
Immanent Branch: The branch of the left-hand path by which the initiate seeks the left-hand
path goals of self-deification (through initiatory magic), immortality and freedom
from culturally and mechanically imposed norms by means of an objective (carnal)
approach to the universe through external symbols and behaviors. Exemplified by
the philosophy of Anton LaVey.
initiation: A gradual, rationally designated evolution of the essence of a person from one
state of being to another.
left-hand path: The path of non-union with the objective universe, the way of isolating
consciousness within the subjective universe and, in a state of self-imposed psychic
solitude, refining the soul or psyche to increasingly perfect levels. The objective
universe is then made to hartoonize itself with the will of the individual psyche.
Originally translated from S mskritvamamarga, “left-way.”
Lord of the Left-Hand Path: One who is capable of rejecting forms of conventional “good”
and embracing those of conventional “evil,” and practicing antinomianism, as part
of an effort to gain a permanent, independent, enlightened and empowered level of
being.
Lucifer, T-pti n name meaning literally: “bearer of the light,” also a name for the Morning
Star, see the Prince of Darkness.
magic: The willed application of symbolic methods to cause or prevent changes in the
universe by means of symbolic acts of communication with paranormal factors. These
factors could be inside or outside the subjective universe of the operator. Magic is a way
to cause things to happen that would not happen naturally,
objective universe: The part of existence which can be sensed and quantified. It is the
mechanical/organic cosmic order characterized by its regularity and predictability, by the
presence of laws.
251
orthodox; From Greek orthodoxos, “correct in opinion.” Can be used to designate any kind
of thought which has a rigid standard of “correctness,” especially ones which rely on
arbitrary opinions or subjective criteria to establish such standards. Monotheistic
religions, i.e. Judaism, Christianity and Islam, are best known for this, but it can be
secularized in forms of “political correctness.”
Prince of Darkness: The first form or general principle of isolate intelligence from which all
the particular manif estations of individual consciousness (or subjective universes) are
derived — the ultimate deity of the left-hand path. An element of the non-natural
universe objectively within the universe itself, therefore an independent sentient being in
the objective sense because it is the very principle of that quality within the cosmos.
Because of its categorical separateness , it is seen as rebellious and “evil” from the right-
hand path perspective. More culturally neutral term for the same entity known in various
left-hand path schools as Satan, Lucifer, Set, and so on.
religion: From Latin re-Hgio , “reconnection.” Largely synonymous with the purposes of t
the right-hand path, to “re-connect,” to unify the self (or soul) of the individual with
some larger whole, e.g. God, Nature, the Absolute, the Tao.
right-hand path: The path of union with universal reality (God or Nature). When this union
is completed the individnal self is annihilated, the individual will becomes one with the
divine or natural order. Originally translated from Sanskrit dakshinamarga , “right-way.”
Satan; From the Hebrew satan, “opponent, adversary.” Used as a historical and
conventional label by modem Satanists as an expression of antinomian practice. The
“Satan” is that which opposes the status quo in principle. See the Prince of Darkness.
A neologism meant to indicate not true Satanism but rather the ideas, patterns
and fantasies projected by the fears of superstitious and fearful non-initiates these
fantasies eventually surface as modem urban legends.
Satanism: The practice of the left-hand path as defined in terms of Judeo-Christian based
terminology. It does not denote die “worship” of Satan, but rather the practice of the
left-hand path in some form.
subjective universe: The “world” of any sentient entity within the universe. There are as
many subjective universes as there are sentient beings, each is the particularized
manifestation of consciousness within the universe.
tantrism: A philosophical and religious tradition found in both Hinduism and Buddhism.
Characterized by antinomian practice, the worship of the Goddess (a contra-scxval
deity), and by sexual symbolism. Tantrism is a tradition methodology and can serve
either right-hand path or left-hand path aims.
Transcendental Branch: The branch of the left-hand path by which the initiate seeks the left-
hand path goals of self-deification (through initiatory magic), immortality and
freedom from culturally and mechanically imposed norms by means of a subjective
(intellectual) approach to the subjective universe. Exemplified by the modem
Temple of Set
universe: The totality of existence, known and unknown.
White Magic: A psychological methodology for the promotion of union with the universe
and pursnmg aims in harmony with the laws of the (objective) universe.
252
General Bibliography
Ach, Manfred and Clemens Pentrop. Hitlers Religion. Munich: Arbeitsgememschaft fur
Religions- und Weltanschauungsfragen, 1977.
Alfred Randall H “The Church of Satan,” In: The New Religious Consciousness. Eds.
Charles Y. dock and Robert N. Bellah. Berkeley: University of California Press,
Angebert, Jean-Michel. The Occult and the Third Reich. New York: ^cmiJUan, 1 914.
Aquino, Michael A. “Revelation of the Beast: Aleister Crowley. CH u (1970) (— The
Church of Satan Appendix 19).
(Aquino, Michael A.) “Official Degrees of the Church of Satan. CH IV:3 (March, 1972 ),
Aquino, Michael A. “Interview with the Founder of the Church of Satan.” (= Black
Pyramid pp. 1-3) Scroll of Set XVU:3 (June, 1991), pp. 7-9
Aquino, Michael A. “Sheep in Wolves’ Clothing— Introducing the Process. CH IV:5
(1972), pp. 15-16. „ _ „ , j
Aquino, Michael A. Black Magic in Theory and Practice. San Francisco: The Temple of
Set 1987
Aquino, Michael A. Book of Coming forth by Night: Analysis and Commentary. San
Francisco: Temple of Set, various dates. _ , + lQCQ
Aquino, Michael A. The Church of Satan. San Francisco: The Temple of Set, 1983,1989,
2 nd ed; 1992,3rd ed. _ , „ ,. 7 D ,., ,
Armstrong, A. H. The Cambridge History of Later Greek and Early Medieval Philosophy.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967 „ .
Aureleus Marcus. Meditations, trans. Maxwell Stamforth. Baltimore: Pengmn, 1964.
Bachoffen, Johann Jakob. Myth, Religion and Mother Right, trans. R. Manheim.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967 [1848].
Bacon, Francis. Advancement of Learning and Novum Organum. New York: Colonial,
1900
Bj.inl'HHf W illiam s. Satan’s Power: A Deviant Psychotherapy Cult. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press, 1978.
Bakunin, Michael. God and the State . New York: Dover, 1970.
Barton, Blanche. The Secret Life of a Satanist: The Authorized Biography of Anton
SzandorLaVey. Los Angeles: Feral House, 1990. _ .
Barton, Blanche. The Church of Satan. New York; Hell’s Kitchen Productions, 1990 .
Baudelaire, Charles. Les Fleurs du Mai. trans. R. Howard. Boston. David R- Godine,
1982
Berlin, Isiah. Karl Marx. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1963.
Bhattacharyya, N. N. History of the Tantric Religion. New Debit: Manohar, 1982.
Blackett-Grd, Mark. HelTFire Duke: The life of the Duke of Wharton . Windsor Forest,
UK: Kensal Press, 1982. . TT •
Blavatsky, Helena P. Voice of the Silence. Pasadina, CA: Theosophical University Press,
1971
_'_, The Secret Doctrine . Pasadina, CA: Theosophical University Press,
IQ 74 2 vols
__*_ Isis XJnveiled. Pasadina, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1972,
2 vols
Blakney, Raymond B. Meister Eckhart: A New Translation. New York: Harper and Row,
BonreL Hans. Reallexikon der agyptischen Religionsgeschichte. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1952
Boyce, Mary. Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices. London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul, 1979.
Brick Hans. The Nature of the Beast. New York: Crown, 1960.
Brennan, J. H. The Occult Reich. New York: Signet, 1974.
253
Brunvand, Jan Harold. The Vanishing Htchhiker . New York: Norton, 1981.
-. The Choking Doberman. New York: Norton, 1984.
Budge, E. A. Wallis. Egyptian Language. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1958
Buikert, Walter. Ancient Mystery Cults. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,
1987. rT . .
Bums, Thomas S. A History of the Ostrogoths . Bloomington, IN: Inddiana University
Press, 1984.
Campbell, Bruce. Ancient Wisdom Revived: A History of the Theosophical Movement.
Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980.
Carlson, Shawn and Gerald Larue. Satanism in America: How the Devil Got Much More
Then His Due. El Cerrito, CA: Gaia Press, 1989.
Cassierer, Ernst, et al. eds. The Renaissance Philosophy of Man, Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1948.
Chamberlin, E. R. The Bad Popes. New York: Dorset, 1969.
Clifton, Chas S. “The Three Faces of Satanism.” Gnosis 12 (Summer, 1989), pp. 9-18.
Cohn, Norman. In Pursuit of the Millennium. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961,2nd
ed.
Cohn, Norman. Europe's Inner Demons. NY: Basic Books, 1975.
Colquhoun, I the 11. $word of Wisdom. New York: Putnam, 1975.
Conze, Edward. Buddhism. New York: Philosophical Library, 1961
Comford, Francis M, trans. and ed. The Republic of Plato. Oxford: Oxford University
Press 1941.
Crowley, Aleister. The Book of the Law. New York: Magickal Childe, 1990 [1938],
-. The Book of Lies. New York: Samuel Weiser, 1972 [1913].
-. The Book ofThoth. New York: Samuel Weiser, 1969 [1944].
-. Confessions. London: Arkana, 1979 [19303-
-. Eight Lectures on Yoga. Dallas, TX: Sangreal, 1972 [1939].
-. The Equinox of the Gods. Phoenix, AZ: Falcon, 1991 [1937].
-. The Law is for All. Phoenix, AZ: Falcon Press, 1975.
-. Uber Aleph: The Book of Wisdom or Folly. San Francisco: Level
Press, 1974 [1961].
-. The Magical Record of the Beast 666. London: Duckworth, 1972.
-. The Magical Dianes of Aleister Crowley. York Beach, ME: Samuel
Weiser, 1979.
-1-. Magick. York Beach, ME: Samuel Weiser, 1973 [1929].
-. Magick without Tears. St Paul, MN: Llewellyn, 1973.
-. The Vision and the Voice. Dallas, TX: Sangreal, 1972.
Cumont, Franz. The Mysteries of Mithras. New York: Dover, 1956.
Daim, Wilfried. Der Mann, der Hitler die Ideen gab. Munich: Isar, 1958.
Davies, Stevan et al. "The Kabbalah of the Natious: Anglicization of Jewish Kabbalah.”
Studia Mystica 3:3 (Fall, 1980), 34-47.
Descartes, Rene. Meditations on First Philosophy, trans. L. Lafleur. New York: Bobbs-
Merrill, 1951.
DeGrimston, Robert Humanity is the Devil. [?]: The Process, 1968.
Doresse, Jean. The Secret Books of the Egyptian Gnostics. Rochester, VT: Inner
Traditions, 1986.
Dragomanov, M. P. Notes on the Slavic Religio-Ethical Legends: The Dualistic Creation of
die World, trans. E.W. CounL (= Russian and East European Series 23)
Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1961.
Eisler, Robert Man into Wolf. London: Routlegde & Kegan Paul, 1951.
Eliade, Mircea. Yoga: Immortality and Freedom, trans. W. Trask. Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1969, 2nd ed.
254
Eliade, Mircea. History of Religious Ideas, trans. W. Trask, A. Hiltebeitel and D,
Apastolos-Cappadona. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978-1985, 3 vols.
-. Patterns in Comparative Religion, trans. R- Sheed. New York: Meridian,
1963.
-. The Two and the One. trans. J. Cohen. New York: Harper and Row, 1965.
Fleming, William. Arts and Ideas. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1986,7th ed.
Flowers, Stephen E. 'Toward an Archaic Germanic Psychology,” Journal of Indo-
European Studies , 11:1-2 (1983), pp. 117-138,
-. Runes and Magic: Magical Formulaic Elements in die Older Runic
Tradition. New York: Lang, 1986
-. Fire and Ice. St Paul, MN: Llewellyn, 1990.
-. Black Runa. Smithville, Texas: Runa-Raven, 1995.
Forsyth, Old Enemy: Satan and the Combat Myth. Princeton: University of Princeton
Press, 1989.
Frankfort, Henri. Kingship and die Gods . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1948.
Frater U.-.JD.-. Practical SigU Magic. St Paul, MN: Llewellyn, 1990.
Fritscher, John. Popular Witchcraft. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green University
Popular Press, 1972.
Ftil&p-MiUer, Rene. The Mind and Face of Bolshevism: An Examination of Cultural life in
Soviet Russia. London: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1927.
Gardner, Gerald. High Magic's Aid. London: Michael Houghton, 1949.
Gardner, Gerald. Witchcraft Today. Secaucus, NJ: Citadel, 1973 [1954].
Gardner, Gerald. The Meaning of Witchcraft. New York: Magical Childe, 1988 [1959].
Godwin, Joscelyn. Arktos: The Polar Myth. Grand Rapids, MI: Phanes, 1993.
Godwin, Joscelyn, Christian Chanel and John P. Deveney, eds. The Hermetic
Brotherhood of Luxor. York Beach, ME: Samuel Weiser, 1995.
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von. Faust, trans. and ed. Charles Passage. Indianapolis, IN:
Bobbs and Merrill, 1965.
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von. Faust: Eine Tragodie. Erich Trunz, ed. Munich: Beck,
1976.
Goodrick-Claike, Nicholas. The Occult Roots of Nazism. Wellingborough, UK: Aquarian,
1985.
Gorer, Geoffrey. The Life and Ideas of the Marquis de Sade. London: Peter Owen, 1953,
2nd ed.
Grant, Kenneth. Images and Oracles of Austin Osman Spare. London: Muller, 1975.
Grimm, Jacob. Teutonic Mythology. S. Stallybrass. New York: Dover, 1966,4 vols.
Guaita, Stanislas de. Le serpent de la Genese. Paris: Ltbrane dn Marvdlleux, 191-97,2
vols.
Guest, John S. The Yezidis: A Study in Survival. London: KPL 1987.
Gurdjieff, G. I. Herald of the Coming Good. New York: Samuel Weiser, 1970 [1933].
-. Beelzebub's Tales to His Grandson. New York: Dutton, 1973 [1949].
-. Meetings with Remarkable Men. New York: EP. Dutton, 1963.
-. Views from the Real World. New York: E.P. Dutton, 1973.
-. Life Is Only Real Then, When "I Am." New York: E.P. Dutton, 1975.
Guthrie, Kenneth S., ed. The Pythagorean Sourcebook and Library . Grand Rapids, MI:
Phanes 1987
Guthrie, William K. C. Orpheus and Greek Religion. New York: Norton, 1966, 2nd ed.
Hamilton, Edith and Huntington Cairns. Plato: The Collected Dialogues. Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1963.
Harden, Grant “Satanism’s Gone Underground, but It’s Alive and Flourishing.” San Jose
Mercury-News. Oct. 29,1978. (= COS Appendix 142).
Heffner, R-M. S., et al. eds. Goethe’s Faust Lexington, MA: Heath, 1954.
255
Helck, Wolfgang and Eberhard Otto, eds. Lexikon der Agyptologie. Wiesbaden: O.
Harrassowitz, 1972-
Herodotus. The Persian Wars. George Rawlinson ed. New York: Random House, 1942.
Hesiod. Theogony. trans. N. O. Brown. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill, 1953.
Hicks, Robert D. In Pursuit of Satan. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus, 1991
Hooke, S.H. Middle Eastern Mythology. Hannondsworth: Penguin, 1963.
Homung, Erik. Conceptions of God in Ancient Egypt: The One and the Many. tr. John
Baines. Ithica, NY: Cornell University Press, 1982.
Howe, Effic. The Magicians of the Golden Dawn. York Beach, ME: Weiser, 1975.
Hugo, Victor. The Hunchback of Notre-Dame. New York, Signet, 1964 [1831].
Hume, Robert E. The Thirteen Principal Upanishads. London: Oxford U.P., 1931, 2nd
ed.
Hunger, Ulrich. Runenkunde im Dritten Reich. Berne: Lang, 1984.
Hymenaeus Beta, ed. The Equinox Vol. HI No. 10. New York: Thelema, 1986.
Jordan, Paul. Egypt: The Black Land. Oxford: Phaidon, 1976.
Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Gesamtausgabe. Gunter Heyden, et aL, eds. Berlin: Dietz
Verlag, 1975, 5 vois.
Rater, Michael. Das “Ahnenerbe” der SS: 1935-1945. Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlagsanstalt,
i974.
Kelly, Aiden. Crafting the Art of Magic. St Paul, MN: Llewellyn, 1991.
King, Francis, ed. The Secret Rituals of the O.T.O. New York: Weiser, 1973.
King, Francis. Satan and Swastika. Frogmore, UK: Mayflower, 1976.
-. Tantrafor Westerners. New York: Destiny, 1986.
Klapp, Orrin. Heroes, Villains and Fools. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Printice Hall, 1962.
Klapp, Orrin. The Collective Search for Identity. New York: Holt Rinehart & Winston,
1969.
Kramer, Samuel N. The Sumerians. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963.
Lewin, Moshe. The Making of the Soviet System. New York: Putnam, 1985.
Lanning, Kenneth V. Satanic> Occult, Ritualistic Crime: A Law Enforcement Perpective.
Quaniico, VA: National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime, 1989
Lautreamont, Comte de. Maldoror and Poems, trans. Paul Knight Hannondsworth, UK:
Penguin, 1978 [1868].
LaVey, Anton Szandor. The Satanic Bible. New York: Avon, 1969.
-. [wri tin g as John M. Kincaid] “An Explanation of the Various
Degrees in the C/S.” CH 2:11 (November, 1970), pp. 7-8.
-. The Compleat Witch: or What to do When Virtue Fails. New York:
Dodd and Mead, 1971.
-. “What is a Satanic Master.” CH 111:9 (September, 1971), pp. 1-2.
-. The Satanic Rituals. New York: Avon, 1972.
-. “Untitled Editorial.” CH IV:3 (March, 1972) pp. 11-12.
-. “Working at Having Fun.” CHTV.5 (May/June, 1972) pp. 18-20.
-. “Music for the Ritual Chamber.” CH IV:7 (1972), 27-30.
-. ‘Erotic Ciystalization Inertia (E.C.I.): Its Relationship to
Longevity.” CH V:1 (1973), 31-38.
-. “Today’s Madness is Tomorrow’s Norm.”Cff Sept/Oct (1975),
[reprt CH 84 (1980), pp. 1-3]
-. “Utopia, Unity and Other Pleasant Diversions.” CH May/June
(1975)[reprt. CH 84 (1980), pp. 5-6.]
-. “Hoofnotes.” CH 8:1 JanVFeb. (1976), pp. 2-3.
-. “The C/S, Cosmic Joy Buzzer.” CH (60) 8:2 MarVApr. (1976),
pp. 3-4.
-. ‘The Law of the Trapezoid.” CH (64) 8:6 NovTDec. (1976), pp.
1-4.
256
LaVey, Anton Szandor. “Brains for Sale Cheap.” CH (65) 9:1 Jan./Dec. (1977), p. 4.
-. “Misanthropia.” CH (67) 9:3 May/June (1977), pp. 2-4.
-. “How to Become a Werewolf: The Fundamentals of Lycanthropic
Metamorphosis; the Principles of Their Application.” CH (71) 10:1 Jan/Feb. (1978),
1-4.
-. ‘"What’s New? Not Much.” CH (74) 10:4 July/Aug. (1978), pp.
3-4.
-„ “Confessions of a Closet Misogynist” CH (75) Sept/Oct (1978),
p. 4.
-. ‘Today’s Madness is Tomorrow’s Norm.” [Reprint from CH
Sept/Oct (1975)] CH (84) March-June (1980), 1-4.
-. “Megarhythm.” CH (85) XH:4 (1980), pp. 1-2.
-. “Power Through Alienation.” CH (85) Xi3:4 (1980), pp. 2-3.
-. “The Threat of Peace.” CH (86) XB:5 (1980), pp. 1-3.
-. “Eustress, Vampires and Vicariousness Revisited.” CH (87) XII:6
(1980), 1-2.
-. “Curses by the Dozen, or Wholesale Hexes.” CH (88) XIII: 1
(1981), pp. 1-3.
-„ “ECI Relative to Memory Retention: A Reevaluation of the Term
Occult ” CH (88) XHL1 (1981), pp. 3-4.
-. “Untitled Editorial.” CH (93) XDI:6 (1981), p. 1.
-. “Untitled Editorial.” CH (96) XIV:3 (1982), p. 1.
-. “Untitled Editorial.” CH (103) XV:4 (1983), p. 1.
-. “Untitled Editorial” CH (105) XV:6 (1983), p. 1.
-. “Untitled Editorial” CH (106) XVL1 (1984), p. 1.
-. “Rhythm, Cadence, and Meter The Foundation of Invocation.”
CH (112)XVn:l (1985), p. 1.
-. “The Order of the Trapezoid.” CH (112) XVII: 1 (1985), p. 3.
-. “How to be God (or the Devil) ” CH (113) XVE:2 (1985), p. 1.
-. “Untitled Editorial.” CH (113) XVH:2 (1985), p. 1.
-. “Don’t Recycle Your Brain.” CH (115) XIX: 1 (1986), p. 1.
-. “The Invisible War.” CH (116) XIX:2 (1986), pp. 1-3.
-. “Satanica.” CH(\\1) XIX:3 (1986), pp. 1-2.
-_ “Music for the Chamber.” CH (118) XDC4 (1986), pp. 2-3.
-. “Illegal Music.” CH (118) XEX:4 (1986), p. 3.
-. “Binaric, or Don’t Try to Teach a Fig to Sing — It Wastes Your
Time and Annoys the Pig.” CH (121) XX:3 (1987), 1-2.
-. “Farewell Trinity and Remember Los Alamos ” CH (122) XX:4
(1987), pp. 1-2.
-. “Give the Children a Chance.” CH (122) XX:4 (1987), pp. 2-4.
-. “For the Record.” CH (122) XX:4 (1987), p. 4.
-. “Comparisons and Equivalents....” CH (123) XXIL1 (1988), pp.
1-4.
-. “Pentagonal Revisionism: A Five-Point Program.” CH (124)
XXI:2 (1988), pp. 1-4.
-. The Satanic Witch. [= reprint of The Compleat Witch] Los
Angeles: Feral House, 1989.
-„ The Devil’s Notebook. Los Angeles: Feral House, 1992.
Lea, Henry C. History of the Inquisition in the Middle Ages. New York: Macmillan, 1888.
Lefebuie, Charles. The Blood Cults. New York: Ace, 1969.
Liebenfels, Jorg Lanz von.Theozoologie. Vienna: Modemer Verlag, 1905.
Littleton, C. Scott The New Comparative Mythology. Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1973.
257
Lother, Helmut Neugermamsche Religion und Christentum . Gutersloh: Bertelsmann,
1934. L ^
Lucretius. On the Nature of the Universe. trans. R. Latham. Harmondsworth, UK:
Penguin, 1951.
Lyons, Arthur. The Second Cowing: Satanism in America. New York: Award, 1972.
-. Satan Wants You: The Cult of Devil Worship in America. New York:
Mysterious Press, 1988.
Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince, trans. T. G. Bergin. Arlington Heights, IL: Harlan
Davidson, 1947.
Mallory, J. P. In Serach of the Indo-Europeans. London: Thames and Hudson, 1989.
Merritt, A. Seven Footprints to Satan. New York: Grosser and Dunlap, 1928.
Mettrie, Julien Of fray de la. The System of Epicurus. [1764].
-. Man a Machine. Trans. G. C. Bussey et al. La Salle, IL: Open
Court, 1912. [1748]
Milton, John. The Complete Poems. London: Dent, 1980.
Moody, Edward J. “Urban Witches.” In: Conformity and Conflict: Readings in Cultural
Anthropology. Eds: James P. Spradly and David W. McCurdy. New York: Little,
Brown and Company, 1971.
Moody, Edward J. “Magical Therapy: An Anthropological Investigation of Contemporary
Satanism.” In: Religious Movements in Contemporary America. Eds: Irving L Zaret&ky
and Mark P. Leone. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974.
Mookojee, Ajit and Madhu Khana. The Tantric Way. Biosion: New York Graphic Society,
1977.
Mortensen, W illiam The Command to Look. San Francisco: Camera Craft, 1937.
Nicholson, Reynold A. Studies in Islamic Mysticism. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1967, 2nd ed.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Birth of Tragedy, trans. W. Kaufman. New York: Vintage, 1967
[1872].
Newton, Issac. Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, trans. A. Motte. London:
Motte, 1729.
North, Robert. The New Flesh Palladium: Magia Erotica . Smithville, TX: Runa-Raven,
1996.
Nott, C.S. Teachings of Gurdjieff. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1961.
O’Flaherty, Wendy Donniger. The Rig Veda. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin, 1981.
Orwell, George. “Politics and the English Language.” In: The George Orwell Reader, ed.
Richard H. Revere. New York: Harcourt Brace and Javonovitch, 1984.
-. 1984. New York: Harcourt and Brace 1949.
Ouspensky, P. D. The Fourth Way. New York: Vintage, 1971 1957].
-. A New Model of the Universe. New York: Vintage, 1971 [1931].
-. The Psychology of Man’s Possible Evolution. New York: Bantam, 1968
[1947].
-. Jn Search of the Miraculous. New York: Harvest, 1949 [1939].
Paine, Thomas The Age of Reason. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus, 1984. [1794-1795]
Passantino, Gretchen and Bob and Jon Trott “Satan’s Sideshow.” Cornerstone 90
(January, 1990), pp. 3-8.
Pauwels, Louis. Gurdjieff. New York: Weiser, 1972.
Pauwels, Louis and Jaques Bergier. The Morning of the Magicians. New York: Avon,
1968 [I960].
Pennick, Nigel. Hitler’s Secret Sciences. Sudbury, UK: Neville Spearman, 1981.
Pausanias. Description of Greece, trans. W.H.S. Jones. London: Heinemann, 1918-1935,
4 vols.
Peladan, Josephin. La vice supreme. Paris: Dentu, 1892.
Pipkin, Paul. ‘The Ritual Chamber at Roissy ” Cloven Hoof (73) X:3 (1977), pp. 1-3.
258
Polome, Edgar C. “Some Comments on Voluspd Stanzas 17-18/’ In: Polome, E.C. ed.
Old Norse Literature and Mythology: A Symposium. Austin, TX: University of Texas
Press, 1969, pp. 265-290.
Pritchard, J.B. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1955,2nd ed.
Rand, Ayn. Atlas Shrugged New York: Signet [1957].
Randolph, Paschal Beverly. Sexual Magic . trans. Robert North. New York: Magickal
Childe, 1988.
Rauschning, Hermann. Voice of Destruction. (Gesprache mit Hitler). New York: Putnam,
1940.
Ravenscroft, Trevor. The Spear of Destiny . New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1973.
Redbeard, Ragnar. Might Is Righi Port Townsend, WA: Loompanics Unlimited, [1896].
Regardie, Israel. The Eye in die Triangle. St Paul. MN: Llewellyn, 1970.
Renou, Louis, ed. Hinduism. New York: George Braziller, 1961.
Rhode, Erwin. Psyche: The Cult of Souls and Belief in Immortality Among the Greeks.
trans. W. B. Hillis. Freeport NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1972.
Rhodes, Henry T.F. The Satanic Mass . Secaocus, NJ: Citadel, [1954].
Riemer, Neal. Karl Marx and Prophetic Politics. New York: Praeger, 1987.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The Confessions, trans. W. C. Mallory. New York: Tudor,
1935.
Romer, John. Ancient Lives: Daily Life in Egypt of the Pharoahs. New York: Henry Holt,
1984.
Russell, Dick. “Anton LaVey: The Satanist Who Wants to Rule the World.” Argosy (June,
1975).
Russell, Jeffery B. The Devil. Ithica, NY: Cornell University Press, 1977.
-. History of Witchcraft. London; Thames and Hudson, 1980.
-. Mephistopheles. Ithica, NY: Cornell University Press, 1986.
Rusten, Rudolf, ed. Was tut not?: Ein Fiihrer durch die gesamte Literatur der
Deutschbewegung. Leipzig: Hedler, 1914.
Sade, Marquis de. The Marquis de Sade: The Complete Justine, Philosophy in the
Bedroom and other writings, trans. R. Seaver and A Wainhouse. New York: Grove,
1966.
-. Juliette. New York: Grove, 1968.
Saunders, Jason L. Greek and Roman Philosophy after Aristotle. New York: Free Press,
1966.
Scheible, J .DasKbster. Stuttgart: [private], 1846.
Scholem, Gershom. Kabbalah. New York: New Aerican Library, 1978.
Sethe, Kurt Die dgyptischen Pyramidentexte . Hildesheim: Olms, 1960 [1908-22], 4 vois.
Seznec, Jean. The Survival of the Pagan Gods, trans. B. Sessions. New York: Harper and
Row, 1953.
Singer, June. The Unholy Bible . New York: Putnam, 1970.
Spare, Austin Osman. Earth: Inferno. London: The Author [1905].
-. Book of Pleasure ( Self-Love ). Toronto: 93 Publishing, 1975
[1913].
-. The Focus of Life. Seattle, WA: Axil Press, 1984 [1921].
Speeth, Kathleen R. The GurdjieffWork. New York: Pocket, 1976.
Sprenger, H. and J. Kramer (Institoris). Malleus MaUficarum. trans. M. Summers.
London: Pushkin, 1928.
Stratford, Lauren. Satan’s Underground. Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1988.
Stutley, Margaret and James. Harper’s Dictionary of Hinduism. New York: Harper and
Row, 1977.
Symonds, John. The Great Beast: The Life andMagick ofAleister Crowley. Frogmore,
UK: Mayflower, 1972.
259
Terry, Maury. The Ultimate Evil. New York: Doubleday, 1987.
Thorsson, Edred (= S. E. Flowers). Rune Might. St Paul, MN: Uewellyn, 1989.
Thorsson, Edred (= S. E. Flowers). The Book of Ogham. St Paul, MN: Llewellyn, 1992.
Towers, Eric. Dashwood: The Man and the Myth. Wellingborough, UK: Crucible, 1986
Truzzi, Marcello. “The Occult Revival as Popular Culture.” Sociological Quarterly 13
(Winter 1972), pp. 16-36.
Turville-Petre, E.O.G. Myth and Religion of the North. New York: Holt Rinehart and
Winston, 1964.
Twain, Mark. No. 44, The Mysterious Stranger . Berkeley: University of California Press,
1982 [1969].
Twain, Mark. Letters from the Earth. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1962.
Valiente, Doreen. The Rebirth of Witchcraft. Custer, WA: Phoenix, 1989.
Vondung, Klaus. Magie und Manipulation: Ideologischer Kult und politische Religion des
Nationalsozialismus . Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Rupiecht, 1971.
Vries, Jan de. Altgermanische Religionsgeschichte. Beilin: De Grayter, 1956-1957,2
vols.
-. Keltische Religion. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1961.
Walker, Benjamin. Tantrism. Wellingborough, UK: Aquarian Press, 1982.
Walker, Benjamin. Gnosticism: Its History and Influence. Wellingborough, UK: Aquarian
Press, 1983.
Waterfield, Robin, trans. Theology of Arithmetic. Grand Rapids, ML Phanes, 1988.
Webb, James. The Occult Underground. La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1974.
-. The Harmonious Circle. New York: Putnam, 1980.
Widengren, Geo. Die Religionen Irons. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1965
Wilson, Colin. G. I. Gurdjieff: The War Against Sleep. Wellingborough, UK: Aquarian,
1986.
-. The Nature of the Beast. Wellingborough, UK: Aquarian, 1987.
Wilson, Peter Lambom. Scandal: Essays in Islamic Heresy. New York: Automedia, 1988.
Wistrich, Robert Who’s Who in Nad Germany. New York: Macmillan, 1982.
Wolfe, Burton. ‘The Church of Satan.” In: Tracy Cabot ed. Inside the Cults. Los
Angeles: Holloway House, 1970, pp. 207-223.
Wolfe, Burton. The DeviVs Avenger: A Biography of Anton Szandor LaVey. New York:
Pyramid, 1974.
Wright Lawrence. “Sympathy for the Devil.” Rolling Stone. (Sept 5,1991), pp. 62-68;
105-106.
Periodicals
The Cloven Hoof 1969-1988 (Editor Anton LaVey 1969-1972;1975-1988 and Michael
Aquino 1972-1975)
The Equinox Aleister Crowley, ed. (vol. I nos. 1-10,1909-1913).
Scroll of Set various editors. 1975-present
260
Titles of Related Interest from Runa-Raven
Black Runa Stephen Edred Bowers , . T v ,
This contains articles written for Runes , the journal of the Order of the Trapezoid, which
have been found to be of general interest This work will go a long way toward
demonstrating the character of symbolic and magical work within the Order, and will mm
some "gaps" in the public’s knowledge concerning the works of Edred Thorsson. This
strictly limited collectors edition reveals for the first time some of the inner documents of
the Order of the Trapezoid. The Introduction includes biographical data and material from
the Lords of the Left-Hand Path manuscript ^ nn
(Edition limited to 504 copies) $31.00
Carnal Alchemy ‘ A Sado-Magical Exploration of Pleasure , Pain and
Self-Transformation Crystal Dawn and Stephen Flowers
This text re-introduces a powerful philosophy and magical technology to the contemporary
world of western sexual magic. Sadomasochistic sexuality is among the least understood
aspects of sexual expression. It is tinged with overtones of the mysterious and forbidden
_these things, as well as physiological facts about it — make it a powerful form oi
sexuality to be combined with spiritual or magical aims.
$13.00
The New Flesh Palladium Robert North , ,
This is the long-awaited manifesto of the New Flesh Palladium, a sex-magical order headed
by Robert North, the translator of Paschal Beverly Randolph's infamous Sexual Magic .
The author traces the development of the idea of the New Flesh through the intellectual
worlds of the 17th through 20th centuries— exploring the ideas of Swedenborg, Sade,
Thomas Lake Hams, Randolph, Crowley, Spare and Wilhelm Reich. This first Runa-
Raven edition is limited to 245 numbered copies. $ X 6 00
Runarmed l Stephen Edred Bowers
The title means "Sayings of the Rune." This is a compilation of 11 essays based on a senes
of talks given by Edred over the course of the spring and summer of I991ev. Their intent
was to explore the concept underlying the Runes— Runa. As such the work is a study in
the operative formula hidden within the present Runic stream. Most of the contents of these
essays have until now, only been available as oral teachings. This is the most significant
work to appear in years in the Runic Tradition— and provides a key to other works.
$13.00
The Seven Faces of Darkness: Practical Typhonian Magic Don Webb
Here is a book which penetrates to the core of the Typhonian current active m the world
today— and does so by returning to the very fountainheads of Setian practice and
philosophy. Never before has anyone made the true Typhonian current more plain and
objective, in practice or in theory.
$16.00
To order any of the books above, send the price plus $1.50 for the first book, $1.00 for
additional books to: Runa-Raven, Post Office Box 557, Smithvdle, Texas 78957
Live Music
Archive
Librivox
Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland
Museum of Art
Internet
Arcade
Console Living Room
Open Library
American
Libraries
TV News
Understanding
9/11